Is it right for a Doctor, or anyone for that matter, to help someone kill themselves if they are terminally ill? I think that it is a person's choice, but also you'd have to take into account that person's state of mind due to whatever they are ill with. What does anyone else think of this?
(Sorry if this is a duplicate...I haven't seen any thread like this though so unless there's a really old one...)
Hmm...well it seems as though you're talking about several things here - assisted suicide, euthanasia...
Do you want us to talk about all of it or some of it?
As far as euthanasia - that's really tough - because part of me wants to help people who are truly suffering and who have no chance of getting better, and another part of me worries about people in great pain but who have potentially curable illnesses going through assisted suicide.
And what if someone makes a bad choice that they would have regretted had they lived? Can this be justified, even if it is consensual?
I was thinking of Euthanasia in the same context as assisted suicde, although I suppose they are two different things. That is the biggest question, would they have regretted it afterwards?
I think it can be justified though, seeing as how I believe that, in that person's mind, there was no hope, nothing to live for, only pain in the future and then dying. If they were able to just say goodbye, and end their life w/o all the suffering, then that to me seems a much preferable alternative than wasting away over a month of pain, drugged up conciousness, and living your life's regrets on what you were never able to do.
If a person is terminally ill, and they are in the right state of mind, then they should ultimately have the decision of when to pull the plug. If they are not, then the family should get to decide.
and they are in the right state of mind, then they should ultimately have the decision of when to pull the plug. If they are not, then the family should get to decide
.
How do you determine the "Right state of mind?" If they were just told they had a genetic disease that is fatal, but is not yet affecting them aside from small things, would that be the right state of mind? Is depression considered a "wrong" state of mind?
How do you determine the "Right state of mind?" If they were just told they had a genetic disease that is fatal, but is not yet affecting them aside from small things, would that be the right state of mind? Is depression considered a "wrong" state of mind?
I believe there is a doctors' definition for the "right state of mind." hold on, lemme do some digging....
.... Well I have a legal definition here
That state of a man's mind which is adequate to reason and comes to a judgment upon ordinary subjects, like other rational men.
Suicide is a coward's way out, only acceptable in times of alien invasion (I am NOT getting probed), besides that, if some form of outside help was to engage in provoking the suicide, i think that's grounds for some kind of assistant to manslaughter or manslaughter totally. Not too sure...
Insanity is not statistical, unlike the definition suggests.
Well in the mind of the courts it is.
Nonetheless, until people really open their minds to the idea I doubt it'll go anywhere. I don't know if anyone has seen it but "You Don't Know Jack" (also follow the age rating stuff and don't watch if your underage blah blah blah) is a great movie for those interested in the history of the issue. Obviously when he went through it through his ordeal it was a different time. But I have a feeling that it might be allowed at some point, after all it's already legal in Oregon.
Anyway, you have to look at it from a physician's perspective as well, and whether or not it would violate the Hippocratic Oath. All in all it's a very touchy issue, but I highly recommend the movie for those truly interested in the topic.
Anyway, you have to look at it from a physician's perspective as well, and whether or not it would violate the Hippocratic Oath. All in all it's a very touchy issue, but I highly recommend the movie for those truly interested in the topic.
The Hippocratic Oath, if it was followed, would bar doctors from removing bladder stones and giving abortions. It's more of a silly formality these days than anything.
The classic Hippocratic Oath is a useless formality, but the modern version of it, doesn't mention stuff like that. Nonetheless, it's the basic guidelines a doctor is supposed to follow.
I am definitely for it. If someone is in so much pain, and there is no immediate hope for a cure, then they should be allowed to end their own life. I think it's so arrogant to deny someone that option, because of course it's easy to say that "life is not that bad" from your comfy chair! If someone has thought about it carefully, is suffering and sees no other way, then it's their choice.
It depends. If you are physically functional, no. That is letting someone give up. Yeah, life is hard. Really hard. But giving up is just stupid, and THAT is selfish.
If you are terminally ill though, Then you can go for it.
