Freethought & Rationalism Archive

winstonjen · 11-10-2002, 01:06 PM

I fully support euthanasia. It's a touchy subject, but here are my views. I'm definitely for it. If they are suffering with no hope of a cure, they would thank you for ending their pain. Those who oppose euthanasia haven't experienced the pain, so they can't judge it for themselves. They don't care about the poor patient, they just want to appear morally correct by opposing it. People who oppose it need to be GIVEN a terminal illness. It sounds cold and harsh, but I'm not trying to flame. The ones that oppose it have NO IDEA what it is like to be in a terrible condition with no hope of recovery. They would most likely change their mind. Keeping the terminally ill alive against their wishes is nothing short of torture. Don't we have laws against that? Also, 'freedom' comes from the words 'free' and 'doom'. Laws against UNassisted suicide are meaningless, because if they succeed, they are beyond the reach of the law.
The anti-euthanasia/assisted suicide people don't care about the person in suffering. Why? It's very simple - 99% of their 'arguments' focus on the moral aspect, NOT the person in suffering. As far as I know, they care more about being seen as morally correct than anything else. They also want the terminally ill to stay alive - for their own happiness - not the happiness of the one in suffering. It also seems that they've never heard of the phrase, "When you love someone, set them free." Another thing that makes no sense in the law is how if you don't euthanise a pet, you get jailed for cruelty. Yet if you do the same for a human being, you get jailed. Why? Religious bigots forcing their views on everyone whether it was their business or not! The trick is to die when you want to die. It's tragic when these people become too weak to commit suicide by themselves, and they need help, but they can't get help because of the legal issues. This motivates other people in a similar situation to commit suicide before they lose the ability to do it alone, so they end up dying earlier. Anti-euthanasia right-to-life (who actually advocate a DUTY to life) bigot bastards also support slavery, because they're telling people that their life is not their own. Hmm. Didn't Abraham Lincoln abolish that foolishness centuries ago?

There's also evidence of Euthanasia in the Bible, so I don't understand why Christians are against it. Jesus only hung on the cross for a few hours, compared with the others, and then died. It usually takes much longer to die from crucifixion, and death is preceded by coma and heart failure. The Romans stabbed him because 'they were surprised he had died so soon'. Death by cruxifixtion is usually preceded by respiratory failure and coma.

There was an Australian Senator who opposed organ transplants (he said that if someone had a heart attack, that was God saying they should be dead). Then HE himself had a heart attack and needed a transplant. He said that God wanted him to have a transplant. Well, why him and not so many others?

What a hypocrite! The people that oppose euthanasia need to be put in similar pain to those that desire it. Otherwise, they can't understand the pain and shouldn't judge those that want euthanasia. Also, the opponents of it aren't going to be affected by it (they're not the ones dying), so why complain? I think they are a bunch of bigots (no offense to anyone here - everyone here tends to have good opinions and good reasons).

Also, check out <a href="http://www.nancycrick.com" target="_blank">www.nancycrick.com</a>

From the main page of that site:

My name is Nancy Crick. I'm 70 years of age and have been suffering from bowel cancer for three years. To say my quality of life has deteriorated is a gross understatement.

I have gone from being an active, vital, healthy woman (I had no symptoms on diagnosis) to a 27kg shell. I've lost almost all of my teeth, energy and, most importantly, the will and desire to live.

Most of my day - and night - is spent leaning over the toilet bowl dealing with chronic vomiting and diarrhoea. I am also in almost constant pain.

I can no longer leave the security of my home because of the vomiting and diarrhoea, and have had to cancel most of my medical appointments for this reason. Would you wish to have me in your car? My energy level is so low that it is as much as I can manage to venture as far as the letter box. On occasions I have made that distance, but have not been able to make the return journey before collapsing.

I require medication to sleep, but am often too tired to allow myself the luxury of sleeping as I lose control of my bladder when asleep, and also am not aware if my colostomy bag fills and overflows.

Imagine if you had to wake up in a wet bed, covered in your own faeces; it's not dignified, comfortable nor compatible with a relaxed start to a new day.

Through all this I am still at home, managing my household and cooking as best I can, sometimes forcing myself over the limit and paying the price. I have some help with stoma management, and am lucky in that I have friends who visit.

Other than visitors, the phone and television, I am cut off from the world, a world I fully embraced before this befell me. I am a prisoner in my own home. If family and friends cannot come to me or phone, I am alone with my pain. I cannot go to them.

As the pain and indignity worsen, I am frightened of the future. Not the future as others envision it: my future - becoming so weak I am unable to leave my bed to clean myself up; being unable to reach my pain medication; having the pain become so unbearable I lose my mind. The only future I have to look forward to.

This type of future would not be visited on a pet or farm animal. Compassionate vets will not let this happen; they gently euthanase our animals. Why then is it so unreasonable to expect compassionate doctors to do the same for human beings? Yours sincerely Nancy Crick

Another issue is that some people don't know what euthanasia is. One person said, "Euthanasia isn't murder, is it? OK, how about if I euthanise you when you're asleep in bed?" That guy is foolish. That isn't even euthanasia. Euthanasia requires consent, awareness and probably a legal signature.

About a month ago, Nancy Crick took a lethal cocktail of drugs to end her suffering. The pro-lifers want to prosecute the 21 witnesses who were with her to give her comfort (she didn't want to die alone). The pro-lifers also accuse the voluntary euthanasia advocates of manipulating her into commiting suicide. They use the evidence that Nancy did not have cancer when she died. Even so, she was suffering from the consequences of cancer and the treatment. She was a 27kg shell when she died. The pro-lifers make me sick.

I believe that anti-euthanasia = pro-torture. Take the example of Diane Pretty, a British woman with Motor Neurone Disease. She choked to death painfully over a week because the law did not allow her husband to assist her with her suicide. She was paralysed from the neck down and was helpless.

What are your thoughts on the issue? Sorry if this is a bit long.

Janaya · 11-10-2002, 02:27 PM

I totally agree with you.

My uncle (only boy in family) committed suicide. He took an old .22 hand gun and put it in his mouth. Unfortunately, the bullet lodged in his brain stem. He survived, paralyzed from the neck down, for three weeks. When the doctor asked him if he still wanted to die he said yes. We were all surprised at his actions. Later we heard that he had been given a diagnosis of cancer. On one hand, I am disappointed that he didn't want to fight it, but, on the other hand I'm so glad that he didn't have to suffer.

The story of Nancy Crick made me cry, literally. I cannot believe that people are still so barbaric that they can extend compassion to other animals but not to their own. I do not have kids, but I do have pets, and I am greatly comforted that when the time comes I can help them avoid suffering. I can only hope that anyone in my family faced with dying can come to their end quickly. (As I hope for myself)

Peace,
Janaya

[ November 10, 2002: Message edited by: Janaya ]</p>

Janaya · 11-10-2002, 02:44 PM

Now that I've regained my composure...

I think that most people on this forum would agree with you.

You might be interested in this <a href="http://iidb.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=44&t=001987" target="_blank">thread.</a>

Peace,
Janaya

Kuu · 11-10-2002, 02:50 PM

I support euthanasia with some reservations.

I am worried about the following

a) That pressure might be put on someone to take this road. Maybe the family might not want to look after granny, or might want her money, and therefore they make granny feel like she is a burden to everyone. Not all families are nice.

b) That the person might not be provided with adequate care, health services. pain relief, home help, etc as those responsible for funding health service might find it cheaper to encourage euthanasia over decent care.

c) That the person is actually terminally ill.

I remember a case in Australia where a woman had a stroke and was on life support. She was conscious and the doctors portrayed a bleak future to her. They said she would never walk again or hug her grand-children and that she would never breathe on her own. The woman after hearing this decided that turning the respirator off was the best idea. However the idea distressed her brother so much that she put it off planning to do it when he came to accept the idea. However she rapidly improved and eventually had a 75% recovery and was able to have a good quality of life,

[ November 10, 2002: Message edited by: Kuu ]</p>

winstonjen · 11-10-2002, 03:17 PM

Thank you Janaya. It's always a tragedy to lose a loved one, but for some reason Christians never feel guilty about keeping people alive against their will. Sometimes death is the ONLY way to relieve suffering.

Kuu, you make good arguments, but families have always been trying to get money from inheritances. The way the law is now, there is no way of truly knowing the motive of the doctor or the consent of the patient. Juries and judges are also reluctant to convict.

Although I do agree with you about money being a factor - there should always be access to the best medical and palliative care. However, if they don't wish to be a burden, of their own free will, that choice should also be respected, as it is altruistic.

Perhaps what would be worse than a terminal illness would be a chronic one - like Motor Neurone Disease - that can take over a decade to kill the victim. Take a look at this example:
<a href="http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/sixtyminutes/stories/2002_05_26/story_599.asp" target="_blank">http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/sixtyminutes/stories/2002_05_26/story_599.asp</a>

Janaya · 11-10-2002, 04:12 PM

KUU,

You bring up very valid points that I think should be debated. I agree that the details can be complicated. Has this been debated before on this forum? I would very much like to discuss this further.

Peace,
Janaya

The Other Michael · 11-10-2002, 05:17 PM

Hello Janaya,

You might want to read through:

<a href="http://iidb.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=52&t=000211" target="_blank">Should we allow family to euthanize the brain dead and the severely retarded?</a>

cheers,
Michael
MF&P Moderator, First Class

Mad Kally · 11-10-2002, 05:45 PM

The terminally ill don't always want to bump themselves off. Have any of you heard of Hospice?

winstonjen · 11-10-2002, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mad Kally:
<strong>The terminally ill don't always want to bump themselves off. Have any of you heard of Hospice?</strong>

Yes, I have heard of hospice and palliative care, but voluntary euthanasia is all about the right of the terminally ill to CHOOSE. I would respect any choice they make. The fact is, the terminally ill are overwhelmingly in favour of choice.

Mad Kally · 11-10-2002, 05:59 PM

So that's a fact eh? I'm a home health hospice nurse. Where did you get your factual information from? There is no need for a patient to suffer from intractable pain these days.

I'm all for euthanasia in some cases. Certainly not the majority. When people are through with chemotherapy and other agressive treatment, they actually do have some quality of life left. They can die with as much dignity, respect and as much pain relief as possible. (in their own homes if they so desire)

11-10-2002, 01:06 PM	#1
winstonjen Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 3,425	Your Views on Voluntary Euthanasia I fully support euthanasia. It's a touchy subject, but here are my views. I'm definitely for it. If they are suffering with no hope of a cure, they would thank you for ending their pain. Those who oppose euthanasia haven't experienced the pain, so they can't judge it for themselves. They don't care about the poor patient, they just want to appear morally correct by opposing it. People who oppose it need to be GIVEN a terminal illness. It sounds cold and harsh, but I'm not trying to flame. The ones that oppose it have NO IDEA what it is like to be in a terrible condition with no hope of recovery. They would most likely change their mind. Keeping the terminally ill alive against their wishes is nothing short of torture. Don't we have laws against that? Also, 'freedom' comes from the words 'free' and 'doom'. Laws against UNassisted suicide are meaningless, because if they succeed, they are beyond the reach of the law. The anti-euthanasia/assisted suicide people don't care about the person in suffering. Why? It's very simple - 99% of their 'arguments' focus on the moral aspect, NOT the person in suffering. As far as I know, they care more about being seen as morally correct than anything else. They also want the terminally ill to stay alive - for their own happiness - not the happiness of the one in suffering. It also seems that they've never heard of the phrase, "When you love someone, set them free." Another thing that makes no sense in the law is how if you don't euthanise a pet, you get jailed for cruelty. Yet if you do the same for a human being, you get jailed. Why? Religious bigots forcing their views on everyone whether it was their business or not! The trick is to die when you want to die. It's tragic when these people become too weak to commit suicide by themselves, and they need help, but they can't get help because of the legal issues. This motivates other people in a similar situation to commit suicide before they lose the ability to do it alone, so they end up dying earlier. Anti-euthanasia right-to-life (who actually advocate a DUTY to life) bigot bastards also support slavery, because they're telling people that their life is not their own. Hmm. Didn't Abraham Lincoln abolish that foolishness centuries ago? There's also evidence of Euthanasia in the Bible, so I don't understand why Christians are against it. Jesus only hung on the cross for a few hours, compared with the others, and then died. It usually takes much longer to die from crucifixion, and death is preceded by coma and heart failure. The Romans stabbed him because 'they were surprised he had died so soon'. Death by cruxifixtion is usually preceded by respiratory failure and coma. There was an Australian Senator who opposed organ transplants (he said that if someone had a heart attack, that was God saying they should be dead). Then HE himself had a heart attack and needed a transplant. He said that God wanted him to have a transplant. Well, why him and not so many others? What a hypocrite! The people that oppose euthanasia need to be put in similar pain to those that desire it. Otherwise, they can't understand the pain and shouldn't judge those that want euthanasia. Also, the opponents of it aren't going to be affected by it (they're not the ones dying), so why complain? I think they are a bunch of bigots (no offense to anyone here - everyone here tends to have good opinions and good reasons). Also, check out <a href="http://www.nancycrick.com" target="_blank">www.nancycrick.com</a> From the main page of that site: My name is Nancy Crick. I'm 70 years of age and have been suffering from bowel cancer for three years. To say my quality of life has deteriorated is a gross understatement. I have gone from being an active, vital, healthy woman (I had no symptoms on diagnosis) to a 27kg shell. I've lost almost all of my teeth, energy and, most importantly, the will and desire to live. Most of my day - and night - is spent leaning over the toilet bowl dealing with chronic vomiting and diarrhoea. I am also in almost constant pain. I can no longer leave the security of my home because of the vomiting and diarrhoea, and have had to cancel most of my medical appointments for this reason. Would you wish to have me in your car? My energy level is so low that it is as much as I can manage to venture as far as the letter box. On occasions I have made that distance, but have not been able to make the return journey before collapsing. I require medication to sleep, but am often too tired to allow myself the luxury of sleeping as I lose control of my bladder when asleep, and also am not aware if my colostomy bag fills and overflows. Imagine if you had to wake up in a wet bed, covered in your own faeces; it's not dignified, comfortable nor compatible with a relaxed start to a new day. Through all this I am still at home, managing my household and cooking as best I can, sometimes forcing myself over the limit and paying the price. I have some help with stoma management, and am lucky in that I have friends who visit. Other than visitors, the phone and television, I am cut off from the world, a world I fully embraced before this befell me. I am a prisoner in my own home. If family and friends cannot come to me or phone, I am alone with my pain. I cannot go to them. As the pain and indignity worsen, I am frightened of the future. Not the future as others envision it: my future - becoming so weak I am unable to leave my bed to clean myself up; being unable to reach my pain medication; having the pain become so unbearable I lose my mind. The only future I have to look forward to. This type of future would not be visited on a pet or farm animal. Compassionate vets will not let this happen; they gently euthanase our animals. Why then is it so unreasonable to expect compassionate doctors to do the same for human beings? Yours sincerely Nancy Crick Another issue is that some people don't know what euthanasia is. One person said, "Euthanasia isn't murder, is it? OK, how about if I euthanise you when you're asleep in bed?" That guy is foolish. That isn't even euthanasia. Euthanasia requires consent, awareness and probably a legal signature. About a month ago, Nancy Crick took a lethal cocktail of drugs to end her suffering. The pro-lifers want to prosecute the 21 witnesses who were with her to give her comfort (she didn't want to die alone). The pro-lifers also accuse the voluntary euthanasia advocates of manipulating her into commiting suicide. They use the evidence that Nancy did not have cancer when she died. Even so, she was suffering from the consequences of cancer and the treatment. She was a 27kg shell when she died. The pro-lifers make me sick. I believe that anti-euthanasia = pro-torture. Take the example of Diane Pretty, a British woman with Motor Neurone Disease. She choked to death painfully over a week because the law did not allow her husband to assist her with her suicide. She was paralysed from the neck down and was helpless. What are your thoughts on the issue? Sorry if this is a bit long.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-10-2002, 02:27 PM	#2
Janaya Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 226	I totally agree with you. My uncle (only boy in family) committed suicide. He took an old .22 hand gun and put it in his mouth. Unfortunately, the bullet lodged in his brain stem. He survived, paralyzed from the neck down, for three weeks. When the doctor asked him if he still wanted to die he said yes. We were all surprised at his actions. Later we heard that he had been given a diagnosis of cancer. On one hand, I am disappointed that he didn't want to fight it, but, on the other hand I'm so glad that he didn't have to suffer. The story of Nancy Crick made me cry, literally. I cannot believe that people are still so barbaric that they can extend compassion to other animals but not to their own. I do not have kids, but I do have pets, and I am greatly comforted that when the time comes I can help them avoid suffering. I can only hope that anyone in my family faced with dying can come to their end quickly. (As I hope for myself) Peace, Janaya [ November 10, 2002: Message edited by: Janaya ]</p>

11-10-2002, 02:44 PM	#3
Janaya Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 226	Now that I've regained my composure... I think that most people on this forum would agree with you. You might be interested in this <a href="http://iidb.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=44&t=001987" target="_blank">thread.</a> Peace, Janaya

11-10-2002, 02:50 PM	#4
Kuu Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Tasmania Posts: 710	I support euthanasia with some reservations. I am worried about the following a) That pressure might be put on someone to take this road. Maybe the family might not want to look after granny, or might want her money, and therefore they make granny feel like she is a burden to everyone. Not all families are nice. b) That the person might not be provided with adequate care, health services. pain relief, home help, etc as those responsible for funding health service might find it cheaper to encourage euthanasia over decent care. c) That the person is actually terminally ill. I remember a case in Australia where a woman had a stroke and was on life support. She was conscious and the doctors portrayed a bleak future to her. They said she would never walk again or hug her grand-children and that she would never breathe on her own. The woman after hearing this decided that turning the respirator off was the best idea. However the idea distressed her brother so much that she put it off planning to do it when he came to accept the idea. However she rapidly improved and eventually had a 75% recovery and was able to have a good quality of life, [ November 10, 2002: Message edited by: Kuu ]</p>

11-10-2002, 03:17 PM	#5
winstonjen Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 3,425	Thank you Janaya. It's always a tragedy to lose a loved one, but for some reason Christians never feel guilty about keeping people alive against their will. Sometimes death is the ONLY way to relieve suffering. Kuu, you make good arguments, but families have always been trying to get money from inheritances. The way the law is now, there is no way of truly knowing the motive of the doctor or the consent of the patient. Juries and judges are also reluctant to convict. Although I do agree with you about money being a factor - there should always be access to the best medical and palliative care. However, if they don't wish to be a burden, of their own free will, that choice should also be respected, as it is altruistic. Perhaps what would be worse than a terminal illness would be a chronic one - like Motor Neurone Disease - that can take over a decade to kill the victim. Take a look at this example: <a href="http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/sixtyminutes/stories/2002_05_26/story_599.asp" target="_blank">http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/sixtyminutes/stories/2002_05_26/story_599.asp</a>

11-10-2002, 04:12 PM	#6
Janaya Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 226	KUU, You bring up very valid points that I think should be debated. I agree that the details can be complicated. Has this been debated before on this forum? I would very much like to discuss this further. Peace, Janaya

11-10-2002, 05:17 PM	#7
The Other Michael Honorary Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: In the fog of San Francisco Posts: 12,631	Hello Janaya, You might want to read through: <a href="http://iidb.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=52&t=000211" target="_blank">Should we allow family to euthanize the brain dead and the severely retarded?</a> cheers, Michael MF&P Moderator, First Class

11-10-2002, 05:45 PM	#8
Mad Kally Banned Join Date: May 2001 Location: LALA Land in California Posts: 3,764	The terminally ill don't always want to bump themselves off. Have any of you heard of Hospice?

11-10-2002, 05:59 PM	#10
Mad Kally Banned Join Date: May 2001 Location: LALA Land in California Posts: 3,764	So that's a fact eh? I'm a home health hospice nurse. Where did you get your factual information from? There is no need for a patient to suffer from intractable pain these days. I'm all for euthanasia in some cases. Certainly not the majority. When people are through with chemotherapy and other agressive treatment, they actually do have some quality of life left. They can die with as much dignity, respect and as much pain relief as possible. (in their own homes if they so desire)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.