Doctor loses license for assisted suicide

[Luddly Neddite]

Maryland doctor Lawrence Egbert loses license for assisting the suicide of 6 people

Egbert's license was revoked by the Maryland Board of Physicians on Dec. 12 after being accused of assisting six people in committing suicide.

BY Alejandro Alba

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Tuesday, December 30, 2014, 2:32 PM

AP Lawrence Egbert, former Maryland doctor, was revoked of his license after being accused of assisting the suicice of six people in Maryland.
The Maryland Board of Physicians revoked the license of doctor Lawrence Egbert after he was accused of assisting in the suicide of six Maryland people who weren't terminally ill.

Egbert was part of the Final Exit Network, a national right-to-die organization that offers help to terminally ill patients who want to commit suicide.

The board ruled Dec. 12 that Egbert's actions were unprofessional. Egbert broke a Maryland state law against participating in a suicide.

"It is undisputed that Dr. Egbert participated in six suicides in the state of Maryland as either a Senior Exit Guide or as a members only exit guide," the Maryland Board of Physicians said in its findings.

Egbert would personally attend each session and hold his patients hands, both for comfort and to make sure they didn't remove the helium hoods they placed over their heads. Suicide paraphernalia was then disposed of to get rid of incriminating evidence and make the death seem natural, according to a report from the board.

One of his patients was an 85-year-old woman who had a history of diabetes, coronary artery disease and depression, but her death certificate said she died of heart failure.

Another patient was an 87-year-old woman with depression, but her death certificate said she died of cardiovascular disease.

Doctor-assisted suicide is legal in Montana, Oregon and Washington.

IMO, one's body should be under the control of its owner. If you want to check out, its no one's business but yours.

More at the link.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Since when is it illegal to participate in a suicide? I would do the same thing for one of my loved ones or friends if they asked for my help. It is their decision, not mine. Looks like this is a test case that will end up before the SCOTUS.

 

[Disir]

I also agree that this is a personal choice. The only thing that is standing between this being legal in all other states are the religious.

 

[emilynghiem]

IMO, one's body should be under the control of its owner. If you want to check out, its no one's business but yours.

More at the link.

Yes and no Luddly Neddite.

Some objections I support
1. If people do not have FULL information and knowledge that their conditions could possibly be
treated, remedied, reduced or in some cases completely cured by Spiritual Healing or other potential treatments,
this is denying people the right to a fully informed decision. So it is not fully informed consent.

If people HAD this knowledge, and still felt that the right thing to do was to deliberately take action
to end their lives early, I'd have more sympathy.

But there seems to be a DIRECT conflict of interest
when the SAME people who keep rejecting and REFUSING to look into spiritual healing as natural
ALSO push for the right to choice in deaths of death but not equally the right to choice in terms of healing and life.

there seems to be political bias, so that is what I would ask to reexamine and remedy
so we CAN HAVE free choice WITHOUT religious or political bias getting in the way.

Prove it scientifically and there is no more religion involved, and therefore no more politics!
prochoice and prolife are NOT opposites but go hand in hand if you get rid of the left/right polarization on policies
making this an either/or situation instead of promoting "all of the above" as equally informed choices.

2. it has been pointed out that making suicide legal
would require careful policing so it isn't used as a cover for murder.

Until we can guarantee it won't be abused,
I can totally see how people would seek to regulate it and restrict it.

Similar to legalizing pot, or other drugs, and prostitution.

If it isn't set up to prevent people from getting pushing into that against their will
for the profit of others, then it still isn't a safe choice.

We need to look at all the environment around these choices,
and make sure the coercive elements are addressed and people are truly informed and free.

3. With abortion, this was made legal before ensuring that people
wouldn't be coerced into abortion. And that has caused most of the protesting.
The pressure to push people into abortions is greater than the support to prevent that.

So if we still haven't solved this problem with getting politics and pressure off abortion choices,
maybe we need to figure out what is going wrong there
and we can better prevent this same problem from happening with
other choices -- from guns to drugs, to prostitution or termination.

People on both sides are afraid of the opponents pushing their onesided agenda.

If we solved that, that would apply to any NUMBER of other cases affected by this agenda issue of politicizing
and denying equal access to better choices to prevent people from being coerces or abused as feared.

It's a bigger problem than just the issue per se. The psychology of public perception and collective sociology factors in.

The good news is, if we solve the problem in one case,
we can unlock the key to solving the political deadlocks in the other cases.
What is going on psychologically, in terms of political positions for or against legalization vs. criminalization,
is very similar. Why not address this head on, so any cases it applies to will benefit?

 

[Disir]

Where is the data on spiritual healing?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yes, such a great idea, allow doctors to decide when someone should commit suicide. No slippery slope there, not at all.

 

[Disir]

They aren't deciding.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

They aren't deciding.

Sure they aren't. Just like the Government won't decide when it becomes normal for assisted suicide.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Read the article his whole purpose for being at the supposed suicide was to ENSURE the person did not change their mind and remove the hood.

 

[Disir]

They aren't deciding. The individual is. People have a right to die with dignity. Your body will automatically react to remove the hood. That doesn't mean a change of mind.

If 10 years from now, you were faced with a terminal illness or faced with a hereditary strain of dementia that was beginning to show and this is an action that you were contemplating I would understand your desire to die with dignity. I would have no right to stop you.

You do not have that right to take that away from anyone else.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

They aren't deciding. The individual is. People have a right to die with dignity. Your body will automatically react to remove the hood. That doesn't mean a change of mind.

If 10 years from now, you were faced with a terminal illness or faced with a hereditary strain of dementia that was beginning to show and this is an action that you were contemplating I would understand your desire to die with dignity. I would have no right to stop you.

You do not have that right to take that away from anyone else.

Well except the 6 he was charged with assisting were not terminal. And no you do not attempt to remove a hood when dying.

 

[Disir]

They aren't deciding. The individual is. People have a right to die with dignity. Your body will automatically react to remove the hood. That doesn't mean a change of mind.

If 10 years from now, you were faced with a terminal illness or faced with a hereditary strain of dementia that was beginning to show and this is an action that you were contemplating I would understand your desire to die with dignity. I would have no right to stop you.

You do not have that right to take that away from anyone else.

Well except the 6 he was charged with assisting were not terminal. And no you do not attempt to remove a hood when dying.

Ok, prove you don't remove the hood or make an attempt to remove the hood. Show me something.

The 86 year old diabetic woman that wanted to make sure that enough money was left to take care of her son that had Aspergers. Why would she need to do that? Where would that money be going?

But, it brings up something important: Quality of life versus simply existing. You can live if you have dementia. Would you want to?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

They aren't deciding. The individual is. People have a right to die with dignity. Your body will automatically react to remove the hood. That doesn't mean a change of mind.

If 10 years from now, you were faced with a terminal illness or faced with a hereditary strain of dementia that was beginning to show and this is an action that you were contemplating I would understand your desire to die with dignity. I would have no right to stop you.

You do not have that right to take that away from anyone else.

Well except the 6 he was charged with assisting were not terminal. And no you do not attempt to remove a hood when dying.

Ok, prove you don't remove the hood or make an attempt to remove the hood. Show me something.

The 86 year old diabetic woman that wanted to make sure that enough money was left to take care of her son that had Aspergers. Why would she need to do that? Where would that money be going?

But, it brings up something important: Quality of life versus simply existing. You can live if you have dementia. Would you want to?

My personal opinion is that if I had no one but me to worry about I would kill myself right now. But it doesn't work that way, I have a wife and two kids, yes if I had dementia I would live because as long as I am breathing my family gets the money.

Allowing doctors to decide when we die is a short step from allowing the Government to decide and it wouldn't be long before that decision would be that the old infirm and marginal would be put to death, of course for their own good and that of society.

 

[Derideo_Te]

They aren't deciding. The individual is. People have a right to die with dignity. Your body will automatically react to remove the hood. That doesn't mean a change of mind.

If 10 years from now, you were faced with a terminal illness or faced with a hereditary strain of dementia that was beginning to show and this is an action that you were contemplating I would understand your desire to die with dignity. I would have no right to stop you.

You do not have that right to take that away from anyone else.

Well except the 6 he was charged with assisting were not terminal. And no you do not attempt to remove a hood when dying.

Ok, prove you don't remove the hood or make an attempt to remove the hood. Show me something.

The 86 year old diabetic woman that wanted to make sure that enough money was left to take care of her son that had Aspergers. Why would she need to do that? Where would that money be going?

But, it brings up something important: Quality of life versus simply existing. You can live if you have dementia. Would you want to?

My personal opinion is that if I had no one but me to worry about I would kill myself right now. But it doesn't work that way, I have a wife and two kids, yes if I had dementia I would live because as long as I am breathing my family gets the money.

Allowing doctors to decide when we die is a short step from allowing the Government to decide and it wouldn't be long before that decision would be that the old infirm and marginal would be put to death, of course for their own good and that of society.

Except that doesn't happen.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

They aren't deciding. The individual is. People have a right to die with dignity. Your body will automatically react to remove the hood. That doesn't mean a change of mind.

If 10 years from now, you were faced with a terminal illness or faced with a hereditary strain of dementia that was beginning to show and this is an action that you were contemplating I would understand your desire to die with dignity. I would have no right to stop you.

You do not have that right to take that away from anyone else.

Well except the 6 he was charged with assisting were not terminal. And no you do not attempt to remove a hood when dying.

Ok, prove you don't remove the hood or make an attempt to remove the hood. Show me something.

The 86 year old diabetic woman that wanted to make sure that enough money was left to take care of her son that had Aspergers. Why would she need to do that? Where would that money be going?

But, it brings up something important: Quality of life versus simply existing. You can live if you have dementia. Would you want to?

My personal opinion is that if I had no one but me to worry about I would kill myself right now. But it doesn't work that way, I have a wife and two kids, yes if I had dementia I would live because as long as I am breathing my family gets the money.

Allowing doctors to decide when we die is a short step from allowing the Government to decide and it wouldn't be long before that decision would be that the old infirm and marginal would be put to death, of course for their own good and that of society.

Except that doesn't happen.

It well just as soon as the stigma for assisted suicide is erased.

 

[Disir]

They aren't deciding. The individual is. People have a right to die with dignity. Your body will automatically react to remove the hood. That doesn't mean a change of mind.

If 10 years from now, you were faced with a terminal illness or faced with a hereditary strain of dementia that was beginning to show and this is an action that you were contemplating I would understand your desire to die with dignity. I would have no right to stop you.

You do not have that right to take that away from anyone else.

Well except the 6 he was charged with assisting were not terminal. And no you do not attempt to remove a hood when dying.

Ok, prove you don't remove the hood or make an attempt to remove the hood. Show me something.

The 86 year old diabetic woman that wanted to make sure that enough money was left to take care of her son that had Aspergers. Why would she need to do that? Where would that money be going?

But, it brings up something important: Quality of life versus simply existing. You can live if you have dementia. Would you want to?

My personal opinion is that if I had no one but me to worry about I would kill myself right now. But it doesn't work that way, I have a wife and two kids, yes if I had dementia I would live because as long as I am breathing my family gets the money.

Allowing doctors to decide when we die is a short step from allowing the Government to decide and it wouldn't be long before that decision would be that the old infirm and marginal would be put to death, of course for their own good and that of society.

But, it's about you as an individual making these decisions. Not the government.

The government indirectly decides in insidious little ways (that people debate all the time) on who lives and who dies. When we have homelessness or an uptick in homelessness and people are left to dealing with the elements it is a death wish. When we raise the age to acquire social security benefits even though there is no guarantee that the people will be allowed to work and/or those benefits do not cover rent then these people are forced out into the streets to deal with the elements. When laws are made making it illegal to feed the homeless then it would seem the government has decided to starve them as well.
These are deaths that people have no control over. They are seemingly foisted on people. It is cold. How many will freeze to death this winter?

Assisted suicide is a personal choice and we are exhibiting control over how we die.

 

[Derideo_Te]

They aren't deciding. The individual is. People have a right to die with dignity. Your body will automatically react to remove the hood. That doesn't mean a change of mind.

If 10 years from now, you were faced with a terminal illness or faced with a hereditary strain of dementia that was beginning to show and this is an action that you were contemplating I would understand your desire to die with dignity. I would have no right to stop you.

You do not have that right to take that away from anyone else.

Well except the 6 he was charged with assisting were not terminal. And no you do not attempt to remove a hood when dying.

Ok, prove you don't remove the hood or make an attempt to remove the hood. Show me something.

The 86 year old diabetic woman that wanted to make sure that enough money was left to take care of her son that had Aspergers. Why would she need to do that? Where would that money be going?

But, it brings up something important: Quality of life versus simply existing. You can live if you have dementia. Would you want to?

My personal opinion is that if I had no one but me to worry about I would kill myself right now. But it doesn't work that way, I have a wife and two kids, yes if I had dementia I would live because as long as I am breathing my family gets the money.

Allowing doctors to decide when we die is a short step from allowing the Government to decide and it wouldn't be long before that decision would be that the old infirm and marginal would be put to death, of course for their own good and that of society.

Except that doesn't happen.

It well just as soon as the stigma for assisted suicide is erased.

Your paranoia is not a sound basis for forcing people to live with no quality of life.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

We need to keep religion and the govt out of our private lives. This is and should be the individual's choice.

If I ask a doctor for help in ending my life, I should be able to get that without repercussions on the doctor.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Yes, such a great idea, allow doctors to decide when someone should commit suicide. No slippery slope there, not at all.

RetiredGySgt

Did you read the link?

As with abortion, its none of your business.

You can do what you wish with your own body but what others choose to do with theirs is none of your business.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Yes, such a great idea, allow doctors to decide when someone should commit suicide. No slippery slope there, not at all.

RetiredGySgt

Did you read the link?

As with abortion, its none of your business.

You can do what you wish with your own body but what others choose to do with theirs is none of your business.

Let me know when an unborn human being qualifies as 'your' body.

Doctors are taught to 'first, do no harm'. To hell with that because you want some help in dying?