Let's be Just Like The Netherlands!!

[Avatar4321]

what he said.

damn, ive agreed with bully and civilliberty in the same week, i must be slipping

If you are agreeing with them you definately are slipping. When i see that they support something i usually have to question myself to see if its actuall right.

 

[manu1959]

I have no lack of compassion for these people. You misunderstand me if you think that. By prematurely taking your life you lose the opportunity to experience a tough, but important part of life. You lose the opportunity to spend time with your family. You rob them of the opportunities to love you and for you to love them.

all i can say is there is always and exception...when i went to visit my uncle who was dying of bone cancer at the age of 24, 1 month away from graduating from medical school....he stood up to hug me and both his leg broke under his weight maybe 100lbs....he spent the next few months drugged up on morphine pluged into a wall socket of equipment....i am sure he and the rest of his family enjoyed that time waiting to go to his funeral and memorial.....i sure know i did....fond memories of living life to its fullest that was....

 

[Johnney]

For some reason people want to think living life to its fullest means only enjoying the good points. But thats not what it means. it means you live as long as you possibly can experiencing all that you possibily can. Pain is part of life. You cant live life to its fullest if you dont experience pain. It isn't a part of life most of us like going through, but its a necessity to experience life in its fullest part.

I have no lack of compassion for these people. You misunderstand me if you think that. <b>By prematurely taking your life you lose the opportunity to experience a tough, but important part of life. You lose the opportunity to spend time with your family. You rob them of the opportunities to love you and for you to love them. </b>

I think the problem is you misunderstand compassion and chairty. Sometimes the compassionate thing is not to take away the difficulties facing people but to care for them and help them overcome it. True compassion and charity sometimes mean you have to let people have tough painful experiences that will make them better off rather than cripple them, their future, or even destroy both before they realize what they are doing.

I hope someday you do learn that. but if you insist on doing the mote beam analysis, you might want to stop being so hateful before you start lecturing others on compassion.

cant come up with any other argument so its back to being selfish again?
6 months of excruciating pain and suffering. meds dont begin to touch it. and you say that it would be selfish to ask for some type of assisted suicide? now who's being selfish. how could you fault someone for wanting to put an end to the suffering? great thing about being a human with choices, if i dont want to do something, or experience something, i dont have to. nor would i advocate someone sit in agony for 6 months while you felt sorry for youself.

in the case of the person in a coma, thats where a good family plan comes into play. family needs to have something put into a will or some legal document that says what their wishes would be for certain instances. DNR's, no life support, what ever else. but that isnt what we are debating here. this has to do with being in pain, real hardcore pain that drugs dont touch. not laying in a bed in a vegitative state.

 

[no1tovote4]

I would not want my life to continue to a point where I was a financial as well as emotional hardship to my family, where my pain is so difficult to bear I ask my Granson/Granddaughter to help me to die (this is personal experience, my Grandmother asked me repeated times to assist her death at the end of her life).

I don't consider it selfish at all to end your own suffering as well as providing for the future of your family at the same time. This gives one time to prepare and say goodbye and leave with all the dignity one can muster, at the same time sparing the family from the emotional turmoil and unnecessary medical expense to keep me alive for a few more hours.

 

[Johnney]

If you are agreeing with them you definately are slipping. When i see that they support something i usually have to question myself to see if its actuall right.

they actually make sense once in a great while. not saying they are freaking genius's or anything like that. sin shines on a dogs ass once in a while

 

[Bonnie]

I would not want my life to continue to a point where I was a financial as well as emotional hardship to my family, where my pain is so difficult to bear I ask my Granson/Granddaughter to help me to die (this is personal experience, my Grandmother asked me repeated times to assist her death at the end of her life).

I don't consider it selfish at all to end your own suffering as well as providing for the future of your family at the same time. This gives one time to prepare and say goodbye and leave with all the dignity one can muster, at the same time sparing the family from the emotional turmoil and unnecessary medical expense to keep me alive for a few more hours.

Well, to a point I agree that it is the right fo someone to take their own life, but this post originated in doctors taking lives in many cases for very weak and selfish reasons. Everyone has the right to take their own life, is can also be a very selfish thing to do. But it's even more selfish to have someone help you do it!!!!

 

[no1tovote4]

Well, to a point I agree that it is the right fo someone to take their own life, but this post originated in doctors taking lives in many cases for very weak and selfish reasons. Everyone has the right to take their own life, is can also be a very selfish thing to do. But it's even more selfish to have someone help you do it!!!!

It would depend entirely on their belief system. You cannot force somebody to take part in this, just as a Doctor could not be forced to provide abortions against his beliefs.

However when taken to the hospital it is rare that somebody would take along the necessary equipment on their own to take their life. Either somebody helps by bringing in medication or weapon, or it will not take place at all.

One can force a doctor not to provide help by signing a DNR, this seems to be just one more thing along the same line. I am not saying the doctor would be asked to administer the medication, but some means of help would almost always be necessary.

 

[Bullypulpit]

very simple---pain and suffering are a part of life that should not be treated so lightly. To just let everyone who opts to end pain and suffering by choosing death would certainly set a very poor example for those who will HAVE to experience it also.

And that's the thing, in five years, only 171 people chose to end their lives a a time of their own choosing rather than endure unnecessary pain and suffering. That hardly qualifies as "everyone". Yes, life is suffering, but so much of it is unnecessary.

Unfortunately, most states haven't dealt with the issue in any meaningful manner except to keep the choice out of the hands of the only ones qualified to make the decision...The patients themselves. The only ones setting a bad example are the politicians and their attempts at apeasing a vocal minority whose genuine concern for life is questionable at best.

 

[Bullypulpit]

For some reason people want to think living life to its fullest means only enjoying the good points. But thats not what it means. it means you live as long as you possibly can experiencing all that you possibily can. Pain is part of life. You cant live life to its fullest if you dont experience pain. It isn't a part of life most of us like going through, but its a necessity to experience life in its fullest part.

I have no lack of compassion for these people. You misunderstand me if you think that. By prematurely taking your life you lose the opportunity to experience a tough, but important part of life. You lose the opportunity to spend time with your family. You rob them of the opportunities to love you and for you to love them.

I think the problem is you misunderstand compassion and chairty. Sometimes the compassionate thing is not to take away the difficulties facing people but to care for them and help them overcome it. True compassion and charity sometimes mean you have to let people have tough painful experiences that will make them better off rather than cripple them, their future, or even destroy both before they realize what they are doing.

I hope someday you do learn that. but if you insist on doing the mote beam analysis, you might want to stop being so hateful before you start lecturing others on compassion.

As a hospice nurse, I deal with death on a daily basis. The toll it takes on the patients and their families is painful to all, and if that suffering can be mitigated or moderated, then it is worthwhile to do so. This is often an instance where the charitable and compassionate thing to do is to permit the patient to choose the time of their passing.

In Oregon, after 5 years, only 171 patients out of nearly 27,000 opted to choose the time of their death rather than let nature follow its sometime needlessly harsh course. Not exactly a flood of people choosing to end their lives. And if you don't think this is a "tough painful experience", well, I hope you never have to have such an experience.

 

[dilloduck]

And that's the thing, in five years, only 171 people chose to end their lives a a time of their own choosing rather than endure unnecessary pain and suffering. That hardly qualifies as "everyone". Yes, life is suffering, but so much of it is unnecessary.

Unfortunately, most states haven't dealt with the issue in any meaningful manner except to keep the choice out of the hands of the only ones qualified to make the decision...The patients themselves. The only ones setting a bad example are the politicians and their attempts at apeasing a vocal minority whose genuine concern for life is questionable at best.

tell us ,Bully---exactly how much of pain and suffering is unnecessary ?

 

[Bullypulpit]

It would depend entirely on their belief system. You cannot force somebody to take part in this, just as a Doctor could not be forced to provide abortions against his beliefs.

However when taken to the hospital it is rare that somebody would take along the necessary equipment on their own to take their life. Either somebody helps by bringing in medication or weapon, or it will not take place at all.

One can force a doctor not to provide help by signing a DNR, this seems to be just one more thing along the same line. I am not saying the doctor would be asked to administer the medication, but some means of help would almost always be necessary.

The problem with a DNR is that it is not necessarily a legally binding document. I've had several patients transported to the hospital emergency room that are DNR-Comfort Care Only, only to get there and find them intubated, on a vent and with a boatlaoad of meds running into a fresh central line. The docs can ignore DNRs if they so choose.

 

[Bullypulpit]

tell us ,Bully---exactly how much of pain and suffering is unnecessary ?

That, dear sir, is not for me to say. Only the patient can make that determination.

 

[MissileMan]

I think the problem is you misunderstand compassion and chairty. Sometimes the compassionate thing is not to take away the difficulties facing people but to care for them and help them overcome it. True compassion and charity sometimes mean you have to let people have tough painful experiences that will make them better off rather than cripple them, their future, or even destroy both before they realize what they are doing.

Ummmm, these people we are talking about have no future, they are terminally ill. I don't know where you get the idea that pain is something wonderful, but maybe we can get you scheduled for some surgery without benefit of anesthesia and see if you continue to think pain is a good thing.

 

[Johnney]

Ummmm, these people we are talking about have no future, they are terminally ill. I don't know where you get the idea that pain is something wonderful, but maybe we can get you scheduled for some surgery without benefit of anesthesia and see if you continue to think pain is a good thing.

exactly!

 

[Avatar4321]

Ummmm, these people we are talking about have no future, they are terminally ill. I don't know where you get the idea that pain is something wonderful, but maybe we can get you scheduled for some surgery without benefit of anesthesia and see if you continue to think pain is a good thing.

Using your standard. maybe we should end your life and see how that feels.

Am I the only one who seem to think taking a persons life just because they are suffering is not compassionate? It just doesnt make any sense "I dont want to see you suffering so im going to kill you."

What the heck does it matter that they are terminally ill? NEWSFLASH: We are all going to die! You don't get out of life without dying. What if someone walked around killing people randomly? You'd be outraged. But whats it matter? They're going to die anyway. Atleast this way they won't have to suffer. I am sure you all seem to think thats a great idea dont you?

This is the problem with taking that line of reasoning to its logical conclusion. How long will it be before societies justify killing children who cant read? They have no future, according to your arbitrary standards. May as well kill them so they dont have to grow up and suffer those horrible experiences in life. Why dont we go kill the stoners? They have no future. they are going to die anyway. Or maybe we can kill all those people with uncurable diseases like AIDS or Diabetes. They are going to die anyway. May as well let them die now so they dont have to suffer. Its not like they have a future anyway. Besides it will weed out the "Impurities" of the human race.

We've seen this logic carried out to its legal conclusion before. I hope the world never reaches that point again. But then what does my opinion matter. im just a cruel uncompassionate man who wont support killing people who are going to die.

 

[Johnney]

Using your standard. maybe we should end your life and see how that feels.

Am I the only one who seem to think taking a persons life just because they are suffering is not compassionate? It just doesnt make any sense "I dont want to see you suffering so im going to kill you."

What the heck does it matter that they are terminally ill? NEWSFLASH: We are all going to die! You don't get out of life without dying. What if someone walked around killing people randomly? You'd be outraged. But whats it matter? They're going to die anyway. Atleast this way they won't have to suffer. I am sure you all seem to think thats a great idea dont you?

This is the problem with taking that line of reasoning to its logical conclusion. How long will it be before societies justify killing children who cant read? They have no future, according to your arbitrary standards. May as well kill them so they dont have to grow up and suffer those horrible experiences in life. Why dont we go kill the stoners? They have no future. they are going to die anyway. Or maybe we can kill all those people with uncurable diseases like AIDS or Diabetes. They are going to die anyway. May as well let them die now so they dont have to suffer. Its not like they have a future anyway. Besides it will weed out the "Impurities" of the human race.

We've seen this logic carried out to its legal conclusion before. I hope the world never reaches that point again. But then what does my opinion matter. im just a cruel uncompassionate man who wont support killing people who are going to die.

ok, obviously you need to step back and see what we are trying to say. were not talking about someone who has years to live, or someone who just broke up with a boy/ girl friend. or someone whose temporarily ill. this is someone whose going to die and that person is in excruciating pain and suffering. hardcore narcotics do not begin to touch the pain.
you mean to tell me that you would not let this person have a last little but of dignity to die with out kicking and screaming in pain?

your talking extreme instances, way out there. i think MM is right, put yourself in their place and see how you feel

 

[MissileMan]

Using your standard. maybe we should end your life and see how that feels.

I'm not terminally ill, in pain, and asking to die. I haven't once suggested that doctor's be given the power to decide on their own who lives or dies.

Am I the only one who seem to think taking a persons life just because they are suffering is not compassionate? It just doesnt make any sense "I dont want to see you suffering so im going to kill you."

You apparently have a reading comprehension problem...noone has suggested allowing any such thing in this thread.

What the heck does it matter that they are terminally ill? NEWSFLASH: We are all going to die! You don't get out of life without dying. What if someone walked around killing people randomly? You'd be outraged. But whats it matter? They're going to die anyway. Atleast this way they won't have to suffer. I am sure you all seem to think thats a great idea dont you?

This is the problem with taking that line of reasoning to its logical conclusion. How long will it be before societies justify killing children who cant read? They have no future, according to your arbitrary standards. May as well kill them so they dont have to grow up and suffer those horrible experiences in life. Why dont we go kill the stoners? They have no future. they are going to die anyway. Or maybe we can kill all those people with uncurable diseases like AIDS or Diabetes. They are going to die anyway. May as well let them die now so they dont have to suffer. Its not like they have a future anyway. Besides it will weed out the "Impurities" of the human race.

We've seen this logic carried out to its legal conclusion before. I hope the world never reaches that point again. But then what does my opinion matter. im just a cruel uncompassionate man who wont support killing people who are going to die.

It's taken a great deal of restraint thus far to avoid calling you an imbecile. I might not be able to withstand the impulse if you continue to post these intellectually bankrupt piles of

 

[Bullypulpit]

Using your standard. maybe we should end your life and see how that feels.

Am I the only one who seem to think taking a persons life just because they are suffering is not compassionate? It just doesnt make any sense "I dont want to see you suffering so im going to kill you."

What the heck does it matter that they are terminally ill? NEWSFLASH: We are all going to die! You don't get out of life without dying. What if someone walked around killing people randomly? You'd be outraged. But whats it matter? They're going to die anyway. Atleast this way they won't have to suffer. I am sure you all seem to think thats a great idea dont you?

This is the problem with taking that line of reasoning to its logical conclusion. How long will it be before societies justify killing children who cant read? They have no future, according to your arbitrary standards. May as well kill them so they dont have to grow up and suffer those horrible experiences in life. Why dont we go kill the stoners? They have no future. they are going to die anyway. Or maybe we can kill all those people with uncurable diseases like AIDS or Diabetes. They are going to die anyway. May as well let them die now so they dont have to suffer. Its not like they have a future anyway. Besides it will weed out the "Impurities" of the human race.

We've seen this logic carried out to its legal conclusion before. I hope the world never reaches that point again. But then what does my opinion matter. im just a cruel uncompassionate man who wont support killing people who are going to die.

Nobody is making the decision to end a patient's life but the patient. Nobody else has the power under Oregon's Death With Dignity Act to make that decision but the patient. The attending and consulting physicians only make the determination as to whether or not the course of the patient's illness will, as is generally expected, result in their death within 6 months or less. When this determination is made, the attending physician writes the prescription for the patient to fill and take at the time of his or her choosing. You, however are postulating a slippery slope which, in this case, does not exist.

 

[dilloduck]

Nobody is making the decision to end a patient's life but the patient. Nobody else has the power under Oregon's Death With Dignity Act to make that decision but the patient. The attending and consulting physicians only make the determination as to whether or not the course of the patient's illness will, as is generally expected, result in their death within 6 months or less. When this determination is made, the attending physician writes the prescription for the patient to fill and take at the time of his or her choosing. You, however are postulating a slippery slope which, in this case, does not exist.

Here we go with "generally expected" again and the beginning of the slippery slope which you deny. You wish us to trust a doctors approximate estimation of time of death to determine if a person should be legally allowed to kill themselves? Although many Dr.s practice as if they had the title, none of them are gods yet and have been proven wrong thousands of times, much to the pleasure of patients and families. What if the person is in severe untreatable pain but NOT from a condition that will cause him death. Should this person be allowed to kill themseles? If not, WHY NOT? Why is dying a painful death not a dignified one? Are we all supposed to go out like a movie star ? I'm beginning to beleive this is less an issue of individual rights and more of an issue of people who do not want to hear, see nor feel pain.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Here we go with "generally expected" again and the beginning of the slippery slope which you deny. You wish us to trust a doctors approximate estimation of time of death to determine if a person should be legally allowed to kill themselves? Although many Dr.s practice as if they had the title, none of them are gods yet and have been proven wrong thousands of times, much to the pleasure of patients and families. What if the person is in severe untreatable pain but NOT from a condition that will cause him death. Should this person be allowed to kill themseles? If not, WHY NOT? Why is dying a painful death not a dignified one? Are we all supposed to go out like a movie star ? I'm beginning to beleive this is less an issue of individual rights and more of an issue of people who do not want to hear, see nor feel pain.

Again, you are wrong. Given the course and progress of a disease process, particularly in the charts I referred you to earlier, it is generally expected that a patient will live for six months or less. It cannot be anymore precise than that. This is a valid expectation given the current state of medical knowledge. If you want an exact time, consult your crystal ball. And yes, patients can survive longer than the six months anticipated, and if they do then good for them! The fact of the matter is that most of the patients who took their own lives in Oregon did so about 40 days after their request for medications to do so. This is in line with the average length of services for our hospice patients. But we do have some patients on service who have been so for 1 or even 2 years. They beat the odds...temporarily.

As defined by Oregon's law, the disease process must be terminal. Intractable, chronic pain such as neuropathy and degenerative joint diseases can, for all but a small number of patients, can be brought under control by medication. For pain which is non-refractory to these medications, there are TENS units which can block pain along the nerve pathways, and in extreme cases, implantable drug administration systems can be used to deliver medication via the same route used in an epidural. In most cases though, chronic intractable pain is the result of lack of knowledge on the part of the physician. Pain resulting from non-terminal process can be managed successfully, and there is no need for the patient to resort to taking their own life. Pain from tumor growth and other terminal processes can be far more difficult to manage without completely snowing the patient. And even then, the possiblity of death resulting from the total cumulative dose of pain medication is always present.

Again, the choice of when to end their lives rests in the hands of the patients. In Oregon's case, there has been no stampede of people rushing to take their own lives. 171 patients out of some 27,000 deaths in 5 years. A minority to be sure, but they had the opportunity to choose when and how they passed.

There is no slippery slope to mass euthanasia and eugenics, except in your imagination.