Physician assisted suicide

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by AmyNation, Sep 13, 2012.

  1. Aristotle
    Offline

    Aristotle Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    1,599
    Thanks Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +125
    Well for starters the California Medical Association. In 1988 the board of trustees voted to oppose the "humane and dignified death act" and also proposition 161, "Death with dignity act" in which this board felt:

    "Legalizing physician "aid-in-dying" would introduce disturbing potentials for abuse. The "right" to a lethal injection could become an expectation of appropriate behavior, and then a duty, pressed forward by other demands on scarce resources and by the perceived burden imposed on others. Further down this "slippery slope," an expectation might arise for other "unfit" members of society (e.g., certain disabled individuals) to voluntarily end their expensive suffering as well."

    As I mentioned before they also discussed psychological factors in the following:

    "Suicide is rarely a rational decision; most often it is a psychologically abnormal event associated with depression or other disorders. This has been found to be as true among terminal patients as among others. Suicidal behavior suggests a condition deserving medical treatment, not lethal medication."

    Regarding pain, they said in the following:

    "Pain suffered by the vast majority of terminal patients can be controlled, and other needs, including emotional counseling and support, can be provided for through hospice care. Legalizing euthanasia could undermine efforts to further improve pain control and to promote hospice care, since an expectation could arise that terminal patients should simply dispatch themselves rather than consume valuable resources by "prolonging the inevitable."

    See: California Medical Association Policy On Physician-Assisted Suicide
     
  2. geauxtohell
    Offline

    geauxtohell Choose your weapon.

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Messages:
    15,125
    Thanks Received:
    2,151
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Out here in the middle.
    Ratings:
    +2,153
    And the Oregon Medical Board says something completely different. To act like their is some sort of national consensus on this issue is stretching the truth.

    Pain can be controlled to an extent in hospice. However, it is acknowledged that by administering morphine or narcotics to control pain, you are likely shortening life. So, again, we can't get around this sticky issue that everyone is going to die and there is only so much medical science can do about that fact. Some people are going to suffer as they die. In an attempt to alleviate that suffering, you shorten their life.

    So there you go.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Aristotle
    Offline

    Aristotle Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    1,599
    Thanks Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +125
    Well one may argue that shortening the life of someone terminally ill and in constant discomfort may actually be a good thing. I mean, who wants to prolong suffering anyway?
     
  4. geauxtohell
    Offline

    geauxtohell Choose your weapon.

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Messages:
    15,125
    Thanks Received:
    2,151
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Out here in the middle.
    Ratings:
    +2,153
    The goal of hospice care isn't to shorten life to prevent suffering, it's to make people as comfortable as possible in their terminal state. The byproduct of that might be to shorten life, but that is not intended. It's just accepted. If you hit someone with enough narcotics, you are going to shorten their respiratory drive to the point where eventually they are going to go into respiratory failure.

    Though, if you feel that way, I can't understand your problem with PAS.

    I think everyone agrees that "euthanasia" (which is not the same as PAS, as much as you might want to claim differently) is a bad thing and should never be tolerated.
     
  5. Jarlaxle
    Offline

    Jarlaxle Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2012
    Messages:
    13,801
    Thanks Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    New England
    Ratings:
    +2,973
    I do not have ALS...it was the first thing that popped into my head. If I am ever diagnosed with it, I will suck-start a shotgun that day.
     
  6. Aristotle
    Offline

    Aristotle Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    1,599
    Thanks Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +125
    I know about the goal of hospice care. I am saying as a sidenote, that the pain meds that may shorten the life may actually be a good thing.
     
  7. koshergrl
    Offline

    koshergrl Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    69,560
    Thanks Received:
    10,733
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +31,238
    Good for you. So you don't need to worry about being kept forcibly alive.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2012
  8. koshergrl
    Offline

    koshergrl Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    69,560
    Thanks Received:
    10,733
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +31,238
    That's not a big difference.
     
  9. PaulS1950
    Offline

    PaulS1950 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2012
    Messages:
    1,353
    Thanks Received:
    238
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Littletown, USA
    Ratings:
    +238
    Koshergrl,
    I am advocating only that each individual has the right to decide when their life is no longer livable.
    There is no need for counseling unless a person wants it. (there is no way counseling will help if they don't want it)
    The individual right of choice is an inherent right.
     
  10. Grandma
    Offline

    Grandma Geezer Chick Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    Messages:
    9,069
    Thanks Received:
    2,750
    Trophy Points:
    360
    Location:
    Under The Sky
    Ratings:
    +7,169
    I disagree. A strict criteria would have to be developed and written into the law books, but there are cases for euthanasia.

    There was a baby that was born without most of his brain. He was kept on life support. The parents wanted to pull the plug, but the doctors refused. They had to get a court order, and it took two appeals. If you've never given birth, you have no idea how that mother had to feel. The baby had zero quality of life, would never grow and thrive, but was being kept alive indefinitely as a vegetable. The whole family suffered.

    There was the Schaivo case, where her brain was basically jello. Why keep someone on a machine for years when there's absolutely no chance of survival?

    There was a woman at a nursing home I worked at. If you've ever seen mummified remains, that's how the poor thing looked. She was dried up and in a fetal position, weighing maybe 80 pounds. Maybe less. She couldn't speak. She never closed her blind eyes. She never moved at all. She developed bedsores. The nurse had trouble with the IVs and feeding tube because the woman was so incredibly thin and fragile. I felt so sorry for her. I was still into organized religion at the time and I prayed every night for her to be allowed to die.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

assisted suicide message boards