Montana third state to allow assisted suicide, terminally ill patients, doctors prescribe medication, self-administer to end life, philosophy imported by immigrants from liberal states like Oregon

GLS · 12-18-2008, 10:27 AM

[SIZE=2]Montana recently became the third state to allow doctors to prescribe medications that terminally ill patients can self-administer to end their lives. Washington State voters approved physician-assisted death/suicide on November 4, and Oregon has allowed the option for more than a decade. Has its gradual legalization changed your attitude about physician-assisted death/suicide?[/SIZE]Also, I am curious, is this concept something that has originated, been debated and pushed by Montanans? or Was this philosophy imported by immigrants from more liberal states?

Timberwolf232 · 12-18-2008, 12:19 PM

This is the first I've heard on this.

mtboy · 12-18-2008, 01:49 PM

This has been all over the news for the past couple weeks and I am tired of hearing about it.

I am of the opinion that this should be our right as human beings. Why should we be forced to suffer for days/weeks/years until we die?

All this does is helps the hospitals, insurance companies, and pharmaceutical companies pad their wallets while our families see us suffering or unhappy. I am a fourth generation Montanan, and this opinion is shared with everyone in my family.

I should decide my life and fate, not anyone else, not a court, and not a doctor.

allforcats · 12-18-2008, 01:58 PM

Does it matter where ideas begin? Ideas travel, and as more people think about ideas, they talk about them, and the ideas continue to travel. Humans nourish each others' minds, and the boundaries of life expand, just like the universe itself. This is a wonderful thing

Three cheers for Mtnboy's courageous statement. The more this idea is talked about, the more people will be thinking about it, the less they will perceive of themselves as being in servitude to ancient ideas, and the larger their worlds will become with greatly expanded possibilities.

Mt-7 · 12-18-2008, 11:40 PM

The worry is that the ill will feel the pressure to make decisions based on finances.

jimj · 12-19-2008, 06:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seven of nine

The worry is that the ill will feel the pressure to make decisions based on finances.

I don't think this will happen and this idea has been tossed around for years, especially when the A.S. law was passed in Oregon years ago.
I think if you're terminal you should have the choice to end it with dignity instead of sneaking off and OD'ing or popping yourself in the head with a bullet.
Could there be abuses? Sure as with everything else there's the chance but as and example that hasn't stopped prescription drugs from being sold. Ideas do travel, if they didn't we'd still be riding horses instead of driving cars right?

rangerider · 12-19-2008, 06:45 AM

Yup, I agree. I think what makes this issue flammable is the fact that you've got several different facets involved. The Christian religion considers suicide a sin, the medical profession has the consideration of 'first do no harm', and not the least, people who are healthy are making decisions on the issue, not the afflicted.

I cared for my Mom during her death of terminal cancer, and I can tell you first hand that the rules change drastically when there is suffering and pain involved, especially extraordinary suffering and pain. None, and I repeat, none of us can imagine what it's like to have a constant condition of no hope of respite from pain and suffering. My Mom stuck it out and the experience changed how I look at issues of care and end of life.

I guess I am one of those that believe an individual has the option of choice concerning their own life. This is a tough issue to debate, but mtboy and allforcats have very valid point concerning choice and departure from some ideas that bind our society. If we all believed exactly the same thing, it would be easier; I'm not looking for that to happen in the near future.

Mt-7 · 12-19-2008, 07:39 AM

You are aware that there are plenty of medications to alleviate and control pain. I am more to that direction. There is no need to suffer, and with the correct treatment plan a terminal patient will follow nature's course without fear of suffering. Does this mean it is a walk in the park? Of course not, and my sympathy to you and your love for your mom. You may in the future treasure the time you had, everything in life is a growth experience. We do transcend our earthly bodies during these times. We are allowed time to reflect, revisit, renew ourselves and our relationships with others. You must understand that I am pro-life and I have walked in your shoes. Coming from Oregon I have seen the problems involved with this decision, both personally and professionally. I am sad to see it here in my adopted state.

jimj · 12-19-2008, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seven of nine

You are aware that there are plenty of medications to alleviate and control pain. I am more to that direction. There is no need to suffer, and with the correct treatment plan a terminal patient will follow nature's course without fear of suffering. Does this mean it is a walk in the park? Of course not, and my sympathy to you and your love for your mom. You may in the future treasure the time you had, everything in life is a growth experience. We do transcend our earthly bodies during these times. We are allowed time to reflect, revisit, renew ourselves and our relationships with others. You must understand that I am pro-life and I have walked in your shoes. Coming from Oregon I have seen the problems involved with this decision, both personally and professionally. I am sad to see it here in my adopted state.

Seven, yes there are drugs BUT it's a little more complex than that. As someone who pretty much lives on pain meds I can tell you first hand that while the drugs are out there it's hard to find a doc that A. Understands how much you hurt since pain is subjective and there's no test to prove it.
B. Is willing to prescribe them to begin with.
C. Is willing to give you the dose you need since the DEA has scared the poop out of them, threatening them with being "investigated" if they're prescribing "too much" but they don't say what that is.
D. Pain meds wear off and lose their effectiveness over time and there does come a point where you can't take enough to kill it, dull it maybe but not stop it.

Then you have to consider a funny little idea called "Quality of life". If you're at the point where you hurt all the time and not much you can do to stop it short of taking a high dose of meds which then either puts you to sleep or makes you so doped up stupid that all you do is sit in a chair and drool and then you repeat every 2 hours or so exactly what kind of "quality" living are you getting? In my mind it's wrong to force someone in the position above to stay alive if they wish not to just for the sake of staying alive and it's definately not right to force someone against their wishes to endure severe pain (what's the difference between that and torture?) if they aren't up to it and there's no reasonable hope for abatement.
That's supposed to be the neat part of a free nation, the choice to participate in life or not should be part of that freedom.

Let me finish this with my personal thought. I don't think I could do it, I love life too much and am strong enough to deal with what's been delt to me BUT I understand those that can't for whatever reason and don't fault them for it, I'm saddened by it but I don't fault them.

Mt-7 · 12-19-2008, 08:13 AM

Well thought out post. I have been with many dying patients and I really believe that they see whatever their vision of the other-world is. I just hope those who choose this option have closure with their decision. I had a family member decide this route with their terminal diagnosis, had a particular bad day and without a word to anyone took the dose. Can not begin to explain the heartache.