Shouldn't everyone have the right to die?

[KingInTheCave]

I was listening to a debate about euthanasia the other day and I did not understand how anyone can think that they have the right to force someone to stay alive against their will. Not only do I think that anyone who is terminally ill and in pain should be allowed to die, everyone should if that is their wish.

Most people will say to a person who wants to commit suicide that life will get better and that they are wrong to want to end their lives. Well, I don’t see anything wrong with it, it’s not like the dead person will be looking back and thinking oh, I’ve made a mistake.

Anyone care to convince me of the opposite?

[thecryptile]

If physical illness and pain are accepted as a reason to end one's life, it's only a matter of time before mental illness and pain are accepted as reasonable.

I don't think we want to encourage euthanasia. Euthanasia has been used in the past to mask murder, both by individuals and states.

From a religious perspective, suicide is an unforgivable sin and a rejection of God's gift of life.

[fuseprime]

I get what you're saying. I'd have to say that someone does not have the right to die if they are depressed. They're not in the "right state of mind" and can get treatment for it.

I think someone who has a living will that says to euthanize them if they're a "vegetable" or if someone with a terminal disease prefers quality of life should be allowed to get euthanized.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

KITC,

How would you enforce the "right to die". If I take my 18 year old child to the hospital after discovering them attempting suicide should I be liable to them? Subject to criminal sanction?

[Arch-MaesterPhilip]

If I found out I was terminally ill with no hope of treatment I would kill myself. I don't need a doctor to help me with it. I can't imagine doing that under any other circumstances.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

AMP,

Immediately? Hope is not a bad thing whould you take the first physician at his word or would you wait?

[Top Notch Balanter]

I would advise everyone to watch Terry Pratchett's documentary on Euthanasia it gives an excellent insight into people who are living with incurable diseases Motor Neuron and Multiple Sclerosis who are either for and against Euthanasia. It also shows the center in Switzerland where the Euthanasia is carried and how it is carried out and what you must do in order to be able to do this.

On a personal level i agree with assisted Euthanasia to certain degrees, Family and friends really have to be taken into account as does the mental state of the person involved.

Self Euthanasia or suicide however is something i severely disagree with it is shocking IMO and the suffering you can cause to others is beyond belief

[Mladen]

When I was med student, much like Jon Snow in NW, I believed that euthanasia is simply wrong. That it contradicts the highest medical principle 'First do no harm', and that doctors are pro-life to the very end. But, then I grew up. I have seen patients suffering immensly, I have seen how life can become hell. I have seen the good and the bad, and the line of ethics isn't that clear about these things. Sometimes, the only good thing you can do, is to let them away. Some might see it wrong, but when all options are excluded, when there is no hope, I don't see why we would let people linger in sufferings. Of course, it is not simple. You must exclude suicidal cases, and learn how to see when there is no hope. Each case is different and should be observed differently. So, I am for euthanasia once when doctor sees there is no alternatives, but not on patients' desire to die. But also, people, you have to understand the other side. Doctors are also not made to kill someone. And you can say to yourself that it was right thing to do, but somehow it haunts you. They become part of you, and you remember them as if they were your own blood.

[Sci-2]

From a religious perspective, suicide is an unforgivable sin and a rejection of God's gift of life.

That would a bit ridiculous, seeing as the person is suffering due to what some might argue is God's flawed creation.

But regardless, why would this matter to the unbeliever or even someone who doesn't believe that suicide is a sin?

Ideally we can come up with a better reason to disallow a person bodily autonomy than some deity's supposed wants? The best arguments seem to be the murders disguised as suicides, the pressuring of certain people into suicide, and as Scot points out the complications of attempting to enforce such a right.

So no suicide ever - or should we allow adults to at least be evaluated for the possibility of euthanasia? (Might need some comprehensive health care for this.)

If still no -> Can we sell our organs? Get a sex change? A tattoo? Do we need government approval for these?

I ask the above because this seems to tie into the question of when we are allowed control over our own bodies, and when the government gets to decide.

[Arch-MaesterPhilip]

AMP,

Immediately? Hope is not a bad thing whould you take the first physician at his word or would you wait?

I wouldn't swallow the barrel of a gun right away. I might seek a second opinion but I can't see waiting too long for a miracle that probably won't happen. I'd get my affairs in order, say goodbye to the people I love and do what I have to do.

[Every]

I get what you're saying. I'd have to say that someone does not have the right to die if they are depressed. They're not in the "right state of mind" and can get treatment for it.

That's a bit of a catch 22, isn't it? If a physically healthy person expresses a wish to die, they're labelled depressed; depressed people are not in the right state of mind and therefore cannot exercise their right to die. How could any physically healthy person exercise that right?

[KingInTheCave]

I get what you're saying. I'd have to say that someone does not have the right to die if they are depressed. They're not in the "right state of mind" and can get treatment for it.

What gives you the right to force someone to stay alive if they don't want to?

How would you enforce the "right to die". If I take my 18 year old child to the hospital after discovering them attempting suicide should I be liable to them? Subject to criminal sanction?

No. I don't know if it should be enforced in this way, but I'm saying I agree with it in principle.

Let's say someone is depressed and in pain, either physically or emotionally, and they want to end their lives because life is nothing more than suffering and pain to them. Then someone else says no you must stay alive and suffer because it would make me unhappy if you died. This is cruel and unjustifiable in my opinion.

[Aemon Stark]

I was listening to a debate about euthanasia the other day and I did not understand how anyone can think that they have the right to force someone to stay alive against their will. Not only do I think that anyone who is terminally ill and in pain should be allowed to die, everyone should if that is their wish.

Most people will say to a person who wants to commit suicide that life will get better and that they are wrong to want to end their lives. Well, I don’t see anything wrong with it, it’s not like the dead person will be looking back and thinking oh, I’ve made a mistake.

Anyone care to convince me of the opposite?

Since you're conflating concepts, let me respond. Every competent individual has the right to refuse medical treatment, so in that sense no one can be "forced" to stay alive provided there is a clear advanced directive in place stating that certain treatments are unwanted. This is neither legally nor morally controversial. So, in that sense, anyone who is "terminally" ill will be "allowed" to die if that's what they prefer. And, honestly, there are few if any physicians who will offer futile treatment where there is unlikely to be any benefit.

On the other hand, "active" euthanasia comes into play where a competent individual is NOT at imminent risk of death and does not presently require any active life-sustaining treatment (e.g. mechanical ventilation, surgery), but desires death NOW to avoid future pain, dependence, or incapacity as the result of a progressive disease process. This is currently illegal ("assisted suicide") in most of North America; in Oregon, patients can be prescribed lethal drugs, but they must be able to administer them on their own. An even more controversial concept of active euthanasia would see physicians administering lethal drugs for patients unable to do so on their own.

Personally, I consider the latter form of active euthanasia absolutely unethical and also generally unnecessary (we can always treat symptoms with palliative sedation). In the former, I am somewhat less decided, but I still consider it unethical. We would be far better served by the better provision of palliative and end-of-life care.

None of this should suggest that withdrawal of life-sustaining care is either unethical or unusual. We do it all the time in concert with family members. Problems generally only arise when there is no advanced directive and families push for treatment that is generally futile and only prolonging life - and perhaps suffering.

I get what you're saying. I'd have to say that someone does not have the right to die if they are depressed. They're not in the "right state of mind" and can get treatment for it.

I think someone who has a living will that says to euthanize them if they're a "vegetable" or if someone with a terminal disease prefers quality of life should be allowed to get euthanized.

We all have 100% lifetime mortality. We don't get to decide that someone else should die by our own hands. I'd say that's pretty much an absolute.

[Aemon Stark]

What gives you the right to force someone to stay alive if they don't want to?

If someone lacks capacity, they also lack the ability to make sound decisions on medical treatment or anything else. However, depression is not in itself evidence of incapacity, and it's not really accurate to say that anyone who attempts suicide actually wants to die or will continue to want to die in the future. But this is a separate issue from euthanasia.

No. I don't know if it should be enforced in this way, but I'm saying I agree with it in principle.

Let's say someone is depressed and in pain, either physically or emotionally, and they want to end their lives because life is nothing more than suffering and pain to them. Then someone else says no you must stay alive and suffer because it would make me unhappy if you died. This is cruel and unjustifiable in my opinion.

I don't know what the laws are like elsewhere, but in Canada suicide is most certainly legal. That doesn't mean it's responsible not to try to help them through their current problems.

[thecryptile]

But regardless, why would this matter to the unbeliever or even someone who doesn't believe that suicide is a sin?

It wouldn't. That's just one reason. The more serious objections are the potential for misuse, both in case of a tyrannical regime and greedy heirs.

Then there is the problem of mental illness. Extreme Right to Die advocates have already provided assistance to people who had nothing wrong with them physically.

So no suicide ever - or should we allow adults to at least be evaluated for the possibility of euthanasia? (Might need some comprehensive health care for this.)

If still no -> Can we sell our organs? Get a sex change? A tattoo? Do we need government approval for these?

You can't sell your organs in the US. It's illegal. I don't know anything about sex changes. You might very well need government approval. You certainly would to get it changed on your ID. You can get a tattoo without government approval.

I ask the above because this seems to tie into the question of when we are allowed control over our own bodies, and when the government gets to decide.

I see your point, I'm just very leery of [assisted suicide].

OTOH, I bet legalizing [assisted suicide] would drastically lower the gun death rate in this country, as many would choose drugs over shooting themselves.

FWIW, I think mentally competent people with terminal illnesses should have the choice [to end life-saving medical care]. But I see the potential for abuse [of assisted suicide], and there are legitimate arguments against it.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

KITC,

Well, if someone really wants to kill themselves no one can stop them. If you make suicide a right you create a situation where such a right can do real harm if someone attempts help someone who appears to be injured. Do we want to discourage people from helping others in need.

[Tears of Lys]

Theoretically, I believe in the right of every human being to determine their own end. Realistically speaking, though, it's problematic. Since we're all so interconnected, we can't do anything to ourselves without affecting someone else negatively. You're really caught by the short hairs.

[KingInTheCave]

I don't know what the laws are like elsewhere, but in Canada suicide is most certainly legal. That doesn't mean it's responsible not to try to help them through their current problems.

Well, it is most definitely illegal where I live, attempted suicide is not punishable (the law here says you can't punish a criminal who is also the victim), but if the police somehow find out that you're trying to kill yourself inside your own house, they will break in and stop you. And you will be forced into a mental institution to be tested and a doctor will determine if you're a threat to yourself or not. And there are countries closeby where attempted suicide is punishable by up to six months in prison and a fine.

If you make suicide a right you create a situation where such a right can do real harm if someone attempts help someone who appears to be injured. Do we want to discourage people from helping others in need.

I agree. I don't know how this right would be enforced or if it should be enforced at all. But I maintain that I have this right, at least in theory.

[TerraPrime]

If you make suicide a right you create a situation where such a right can do real harm if someone attempts help someone who appears to be injured. Do we want to discourage people from helping others in need.

Wait, what? What harm is done to whom?

[sologdin]

Wait, what? What harm is done to whom?

lawsuit against good samaritan for infringement of a fundamental right, maybe. might pop some teeth in basically defunct wrongful life cases--damages for P&S, medical bills, false imprisonment, &c. and, if a state actor, say, cops or public EMT, then it becomes a civil rights suit, which allows punitives and fee-shifting. this all causes chilling effect on good samaritans and good faith public servants, who might hesitate to render assistance in ambiguous OD cases for fear running afoul of the hypothetical fundamental right to suicide.

and, if it's a fundamental right, does that mean claims for assistance can be submitted on HCFA 1500 for reimbursements? then the death panel lie gets less dishonest, and that's nasty business.