ELITEOFWARMAN8
King
No one has to suffer though. If you really bad and want to die, then.... be at peace.
Euthanasia in the news again
- Thread starter Borachio
- Start date
Sick or old animals do sometimes go off by themselves to die. One of my own cats did that. I'd rather he'd stuck around like my oldest cat did - she died at my feet. It was (and still is) heartbreaking, but at least I don't have to wonder where her body ended up and if her remains were treated with dignity and respect. I will never have that closure for my Gussy.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,377
This is a really complicated thing, a personal thing for all people involved in each case. For many years it has been a personal thing. For many years family, patients and and medics (who succeeded the priests on the job) often did as they thought best, coroners understood and looked aside, and no one else meddled. Certainly along the way murders (as in actual murders against the will of the patient) were committed under cover of euthanasia. And certainly there were also people who wished to die but to whom help was denied.
Should states legislate about this? Perhaps it were best to leave things as they have been, let it remain personal, despite the errors and evils that may occasionally come from it. To force some uniformity will also harm some people, whichever path is chosen: prohibition or rules for "legalizing" it.
It seems to me, though, that the time when death could still have something personal, or at least familiar, about it has already come to an end. Now people no longer die at home, they die in the hospital. And bureaucracy in the hospital keeps getting tighter. The net where we are caught from birth to death keeps getting ever tighter, and death becomes the exclusive business of the state and the medical technicians, not of the family of the moribund and certainly not of the moribund himself. I've seen both kinds of death. Call me a traditionalism, but I don't like this new kind. The theory may look good but I've seen it done that way - keep them till the last - and I hated it all.
If legalized suicide will restore a person's right to die on its own terms, to make his farewells (how more often is death now hidden even from family, how often people die alone?) and say his last will, and dispose of his affairs as he wishes, then it can be for the better. But I fear it won't, that euthanasia will still only be authorized in the modern dying places, in the alien spaces of the clinics and hospitals, a "ritual" by the medical priesthood to be as hidden from the sight of the living as possible. The rules that will likely be done will so strive to "protect" people that they'll still rob them of choice and dignity in their death. If there even is a good way to die...
The problem, of course, in in what "dignity" means, and for whom. In understanding
who is that dying piece of flesh and bones and what does it wish. There are people who cling to life to the last indeed, despite the... discomfort they cause to everyone else witnessing it. There are people who don't cling and just want it to end. And there are people who change their mind. And those who keep changing their mind. There is just no universal solution to this problem. And there are all kings of opinions on death: some people certainly like the death-as-an-alien-thing way. Better a whole life where death doesn't show up and a messy ending that living with it around? Or better a familiarity with death and to meed ending knowing what is expected of dying? Who knows? If only peaceful death were as simple to legislate about as violent death!
Should states legislate about this? Perhaps it were best to leave things as they have been, let it remain personal, despite the errors and evils that may occasionally come from it. To force some uniformity will also harm some people, whichever path is chosen: prohibition or rules for "legalizing" it.
It seems to me, though, that the time when death could still have something personal, or at least familiar, about it has already come to an end. Now people no longer die at home, they die in the hospital. And bureaucracy in the hospital keeps getting tighter. The net where we are caught from birth to death keeps getting ever tighter, and death becomes the exclusive business of the state and the medical technicians, not of the family of the moribund and certainly not of the moribund himself. I've seen both kinds of death. Call me a traditionalism, but I don't like this new kind. The theory may look good but I've seen it done that way - keep them till the last - and I hated it all.
If legalized suicide will restore a person's right to die on its own terms, to make his farewells (how more often is death now hidden even from family, how often people die alone?) and say his last will, and dispose of his affairs as he wishes, then it can be for the better. But I fear it won't, that euthanasia will still only be authorized in the modern dying places, in the alien spaces of the clinics and hospitals, a "ritual" by the medical priesthood to be as hidden from the sight of the living as possible. The rules that will likely be done will so strive to "protect" people that they'll still rob them of choice and dignity in their death. If there even is a good way to die...
The problem, of course, in in what "dignity" means, and for whom. In understanding
who is that dying piece of flesh and bones and what does it wish. There are people who cling to life to the last indeed, despite the... discomfort they cause to everyone else witnessing it. There are people who don't cling and just want it to end. And there are people who change their mind. And those who keep changing their mind. There is just no universal solution to this problem. And there are all kings of opinions on death: some people certainly like the death-as-an-alien-thing way. Better a whole life where death doesn't show up and a messy ending that living with it around? Or better a familiarity with death and to meed ending knowing what is expected of dying? Who knows? If only peaceful death were as simple to legislate about as violent death!
It, and colonic cancer, are drastically underfunded vs. the amount of suffering they cause.
xkcd cancer
In the documentary the Cove, one animal handler claimed that one of his dolphins killed itself on purpose. Obviously, one observation/anecdote only, but it would be *huge* if dolphins could commit suicide.
I've had cats do that too, but that's not an active process. That's more like realizing you're going to die and making preparations for it. If a cat is going to die, what is it going to do about it?
Yeah. Dolphins killing themselves in captivity has been documented, but so has dolphins thrashing themselves against rocks / walls when they're stressed. It's akin to a human cutting themselves when in extreme distress. If you did that and then accidentally nicked your artery and bled to death, that's not really suicide as it is accidental death. It'll sure look like suicide though.
edit: as a side note, this is a fantastic reason to not keep intelligent cetaceans in captivity
I've not heard of any documented cases, but the example in the Cove was that the dolphin swam up to him, sunk underwater, and then release his blowhole and sucked in water.
It just leaped out at me, because if dolphins could foresee and plan their deaths, because of depression, that would be a pretty big thing. We already know that they're meeting many of the standards of personhood, and with the ability to 'identify with self' really could come the metacognition to know that one's life might not be worth living anymore.
It just leaped out at me, because if dolphins could foresee and plan their deaths, because of depression, that would be a pretty big thing. We already know that they're meeting many of the standards of personhood, and with the ability to 'identify with self' really could come the metacognition to know that one's life might not be worth living anymore.
Often, end of life palliative care means so much painkillers they end up killing the patient. When it comes to end of life care we often can't draw a hard-and-fast distinction between ongoing treatment and ending a life.
We already, to a certain extent, do have euthanasia through this principle of double effect. It's just generally vague and implicit due to lack of legal protection for those performing it.
Save_Ferris
Admiring Myself
I've heard that some elephants have lost the will to live after their loved ones have died, though I'm not sure if it's to the point of suicide.
By the way, if your dog kept on trying to commit suicide, would you kill it? Just a moral dilemma.
By the way, if your dog kept on trying to commit suicide, would you kill it? Just a moral dilemma.
PlutonianEmpire
King of the Plutonian Empire
I think the reason he remained alive instead of killing himself right away was that he may have wanted to champion for the rights of others as well as his own, to decide to end their lives, and that that may be why he stayed for so long?
Are you mentally sound? Please find a psychiatrist to confirm this.
Do you have a terminal illness with less than 6 months to live? Please have 2 doctors confirm this.
Okay, find a doctor who is willing to write you the prescription of a huge bottle of benzos and anti-nauseants and a pharmacist willing to dispense them. No doctor or pharmacist will be required to write / dispense this prescription against his or her will.
Now you have a way to kill yourself quickly whenever you're ready. Fall asleep within a minute of taking the dose, never wake up. You can keep it around until it's time to go. If you're curious how jurisdictions with assisted suicide laws do it, there's a documentary called How to Die in Oregon. It's moving.
Ajidica
High Quality Person
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 22,482
I know the Minnesota Zoo is getting rid of the Dolphin tank because of the high number of Dolphins appearing to commit suicide there (IIRC, three in the last four years).
I said "difficult questions", so let's start by assuming that I am not. Say that I am 90 years old and suffer from dementia.
The 'mentally sound' bit causes me a bit of confusion. If the person is reporting that they're in horrible pain and want to die, and the doctor's confirm that it's a fatal and painful condition ... why does the person need to be sane? A person with dementia can want to die just as much as a person without dementia.
Snorrius
Librivorator
I think you voice typical views of modern bourgeois of Anglo-Saxon upbringing. People have no right for sex nor for death, no guns and no knifes. It is boring as hell.
Before judging him try to stay still on the bed at least for a couple of hours (without sleeping). It is not easy - not easy at all. The idea to live is such state is horrendous. I do not even mention how hard it can be for relatives. And what exactly he had to continue? Writing books? It require to have a specific abilities, not everyone has it.
You should seriously revaluate your outdated old aeonic views which are based on ignorance and religious morale.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
Thank you, everyone, for your contributions.
Let me sum up my position with this scenario:
Someone "comes" to you and says - or communicates in some way -
"My life is worthless and unbearable."
Do you say, "Yes, I agree. I will end it for you"?
Or do you say, "No. All life has worth. I shall help you bear it"?
It is a stark choice.
Let me sum up my position with this scenario:
Someone "comes" to you and says - or communicates in some way -
"My life is worthless and unbearable."
Do you say, "Yes, I agree. I will end it for you"?
Or do you say, "No. All life has worth. I shall help you bear it"?
It is a stark choice.
Snorrius
Librivorator
Most will prefer to say either Yes or No but without actual involvement.
rugbyLEAGUEfan
Deity
Ideally, I'd hope that one day euthanasia is widely legal and it's practice unaffected by religious considerations.
My concern though is that humans are a long way from demonstrating close to the respect for life (and NO, I'm not referring to bloody abortion. I'm talking about warfare, murder etc) required to allow a functioning system of legal euthanasia for the sick and dying. And this is unfortunate for those who today I would consider valid candidates.
My concern though is that humans are a long way from demonstrating close to the respect for life (and NO, I'm not referring to bloody abortion. I'm talking about warfare, murder etc) required to allow a functioning system of legal euthanasia for the sick and dying. And this is unfortunate for those who today I would consider valid candidates.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
Lying to sick people seems kind of messed up.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
Well, come to that euthanasia means "good death". So in a sense everyone is in favour.
But this topic is about prematurely ending a life which is considered to have reached the point of worthlessness. My view is that this point is never reached. Or to be more precise, I have yet to see it.
It seems so strange to me that people can appear to undervalue any life. When, as far as anyone knows for sure, this is all that we have.
But this subject is beginning to depress me. Let's have a party instead.
But this topic is about prematurely ending a life which is considered to have reached the point of worthlessness. My view is that this point is never reached. Or to be more precise, I have yet to see it.
It seems so strange to me that people can appear to undervalue any life. When, as far as anyone knows for sure, this is all that we have.
But this subject is beginning to depress me. Let's have a party instead.
Similar threads
