U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-08-2008, 08:25 AM
 
Location: N. Ga
3,492 posts, read 3,096,402 times
Reputation: 1833

Advertisements

Should Euthanasia be legal and is there a moral difference between passive and active euthanasia?

Intensely personal decisions should not be left to governments or judges, senators nor congress. But, I've yet to hear either candidate this election give a clear-concise opinion either way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-08-2008, 08:45 AM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
3,088 posts, read 4,542,478 times
Reputation: 1598
Right now, with the world and national financial crisis, subjects such as a "right" for euthanasia are way down on the list of "what is most important". This is an interesting topic, however, and one that needs many types of "failsafes" in order to prevent the kind of "abuse" that may see people euthanized due to financial concerns or other factors. We should, however, consider how we view euthanasia as a way to minimize suffering for domestic animals, and see if there is a way that this principal can be applied for those in extreme physical / mental distress, with no hope of recovery, who wish for a "release".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2008, 10:26 AM
 
372 posts, read 760,665 times
Reputation: 126
I see absolutely no reason why it shouldn't be legal... or at least the decision should be left up to the states to decide.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2008, 12:49 PM
 
Location: Ottawa, Canada
609 posts, read 1,043,265 times
Reputation: 173
It should never ever ever be legal for a couple reasons. FIrst of all who is to decide who can die? you? the the state? If we begin to decide we have to set laws and precendence.

So lets say we say everyone with severe cerebral palsy like that girl who was killed by her dad in Canada. When we do this, we are making a judgment of quality of life. if we decided that we are deciding quality of life

people in this debate never forget that important phrase QUALITY OF LIFE. we cant put a label on someones life and say "oh hes in pain, itd be terrible. id want to die if i were him". or "oh she has cerebral palsy, her life is terrible" because when you do that you are judging the quality of life.

and when you do that, tis easier to say that people with lower qualities of life should die. but where does it end? if we decide that its inhumane for people with a low quality of life to live, then we me "humanely" apply this to all people. because to do so, and let them live in thier "terrible condition" would be bad. so therefore, all people, no matter thier will to live or not (because as we have seen there are people with similar cases of aggressive diseases and some who want to live and some who dont"

The danger is that we would have to apply it to everyone, because the "right to die" is universal. and to not do so, would be, by law, "illegal"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2008, 03:21 PM
 
28,906 posts, read 45,194,930 times
Reputation: 45811
I'm very suspicious of euthanasia arguments. What? Are there no tall buildings, firearms, or gas ovens where the people in question live?

The problem is this. The Right To Die is a slippery slope, very quickly becoming The Duty To Die. Already, the Netherlands give family members the right to turn off the machinery of patients who have not given permission for their own death.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2008, 04:05 PM
 
13,779 posts, read 23,205,335 times
Reputation: 7378
As a person with a chronic disease that could become permanently debilitating, it is a thought to ponder.

The task of finding the "perfect" balance of compassion and someone's rights would be almost impossible. An advanced directive is hard enough to decipher since there are so many varying definitions of heroic measures so I feel the right to euthanize would be riddled with more questions than answers.

Who has the right to say I should die? Who knows if I am in such agonizing pain I should die? Who knows if my life is not worth living? Everyone has different thresholds for discomfort and pain. Everyone has different definitions of quality of life.

My husband and I have agreements that are exclusive between the two of us...God willing we do not divorce!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2008, 04:21 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
3,088 posts, read 4,542,478 times
Reputation: 1598
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrstewart View Post
As a person with a chronic disease that could become permanently debilitating, it is a thought to ponder.

The task of finding the "perfect" balance of compassion and someone's rights would be almost impossible. An advanced directive is hard enough to decipher since there are so many varying definitions of heroic measures so I feel the right to euthanize would be riddled with more questions than answers.

Who has the right to say I should die? Who knows if I am in such agonizing pain I should die? Who knows if my life is not worth living? Everyone has different thresholds for discomfort and pain. Everyone has different definitions of quality of life.

My husband and I have agreements that are exclusive between the two of us...God willing we do not divorce!
You are lucky, Polly, to have such agreements. Everyone does not have someone that can be so relied upon. I would like, at least, access to "lethal dosage", in case of emergency! There is an old folk song about the Appalacian miners, who did not go underground without their "tin of morphene". . . just in case. . .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2008, 04:25 PM
 
13,779 posts, read 23,205,335 times
Reputation: 7378
Quote:
Originally Posted by cap1717 View Post
You are lucky, Polly, to have such agreements. Everyone does not have someone that can be so relied upon. I would like, at least, access to "lethal dosage", in case of emergency! There is an old folk song about the Appalacian miners, who did not go underground without their "tin of morphene". . . just in case. . .
A "tin of Morphine" would be a plus! Thank you for your kind words.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2008, 08:34 PM
 
Location: Northglenn, Colorado
3,689 posts, read 9,250,335 times
Reputation: 944
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrstewart View Post
As a person with a chronic disease that could become permanently debilitating, it is a thought to ponder.

The task of finding the "perfect" balance of compassion and someone's rights would be almost impossible. An advanced directive is hard enough to decipher since there are so many varying definitions of heroic measures so I feel the right to euthanize would be riddled with more questions than answers.

Who has the right to say I should die? Who knows if I am in such agonizing pain I should die? Who knows if my life is not worth living? Everyone has different thresholds for discomfort and pain. Everyone has different definitions of quality of life.

My husband and I have agreements that are exclusive between the two of us...God willing we do not divorce!


I have to agree with you for the exact same reasons. I had been completely against it until I was diagnosed with my chronic illness. There has to be some extremely carefully crafting of the laws though, and I would think that ONLY the patient can make this decision. We MUST make sure the government has its hands off of things except to craft the law. I don't want the government to start deciding who is worth keeping around, and who is better off dead in our society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2008, 09:54 PM
 
Location: The Netherlands
8,567 posts, read 14,514,836 times
Reputation: 1573
Originally Posted by cpg35223
Quote:
Already, the Netherlands give family members the right to turn off the machinery of patients who have not given permission for their own death.
So? You Americans have the right to bear arms and can go on killing sprees.
Besides you are wrong, the medical professionals must have a valid reason to turn off the machinery.
At least the Dutch acknowledge that suffering (whether it is only physical or psychological) could be a fate far worse than death.

Funny, when an animal is suffering it is considered humane to put it out of its misery, but when it comes to humans we should do nothing?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top