Spoiler: Brittanica's definition of Euthenasia Euthanasia, also called mercy killing, act or practice of painlessly putting to death persons suffering from painful and incurable disease or incapacitating physical disorder or allowing them to die by withholding treatment or withdrawing artificial life-support measures. https://www.britannica.com/topic/euthanasia What are your personal thoughts on it? Do you approve of it or no? No political or religious reasoning or arguments, thanks.
if you ever saw some people suffer in the hospital, who are sure they are going to die but will suffer until death release them you'd say they should be able to get it ^^ i'm all for it
Personally I would do it depending on situation. If it's really a suffering to stay alive than dying then yes. But if it's like a coma then i would wait for long time like decades before thinking about anything else. It's really hard to answer this cause it's asking about our close family. I wouldn't even think about such scenarios so anything I say now is just me ranting.
In general such as brain dead conditions or the equivalent then yes. In other one such as vegetative state, illness, etc then i don't. Let it run it course unless the subject itself ask for their own termination.
I once read a good argument against "the right to die/suicide." It basically stated that if such a thing were to be accepted and implemented, then it would possibly lower the bar for medicine for it would be a form of a final treatment for those who are in 'need' of such. And that would, in a way, limit the potential and breakthroughs of said field. Found the comment: Llosar's argument (Reddit) "Suicide should not be a human right, because it would be accepting that it is the highest form of ‘cure’ for those suffering from mental illnesses. I completely agree that right now we do not have the best treatments and certainly lack cures for mental health conditions, however, 50 years ago we didn’t have good treatments for diabetes and HIV, all cancer was a death sentence, and we wouldn’t have dreamt of performing organ transplants. It is because we needed to continue to push the boundaries of medicine that these treatments appeared. If we start to accept that suicide is the only cure for mental health, we cannot continue to push the boundaries of medicine in this area and therefore work towards good treatments."
I think it’s between the patient and the doctor. So long as it’s the patient’s decision after having all the facts and thinking carefully, no one else should interfere. Euthanasia without the patient’s (or family’s, in case of vegetative coma) consent is murder, but hopefully those cases are mostly just a part of horror games and movies.
That’s a bit like saying it’s okay to experiment on people because they’re dying. If you’re forcing people to suffer immensely against their will, just to experiment and try to increase medicine’s potential, is it worth the cost of that person’s suffering?
I don't have a terminal illness, nor does any one from my family. Automatically, any opinion I have shouldn't be considered in the debate. If this principle was followed in debates, it would be so much better! You may think that this leads to some views being ignored, but actually, these views come fom people who are ignorant of the issue. No matter how much you read or learn, you cannot imagine suffering. You just got to sit out when it ain't about you.
I see, I see. But euthenasia, for what it is, beats the purpose and basically goes against the essence of an hospital and the entire medical field, and its code of ethics. I'm trying to look at it as a whole rather than from an individual's perspective.
You see, to me, suicide is like shutting down a computer because it has a virus. It's not the actual solution. The point is that we strive to improve medicine for us to truly find a way to discover a fitting solution to mental illness, rather than just "give up."
A little joke in the family: "Life is a choice." 3 uncles got euthanised in as many years and everyone agreed it was the "best" option. Now we have that semi-serious joke which is mentioned at least once at family gatherings. Euthanasia should be a real option in hospitals/hospices and not just something they claim is available and then adamantly withold it from people who want or need it.
I'll leave that to doctors to figure out for themselves, I am not a saint to think about others ethics when I have bigger struggles in heart.
But would an individual in such a situation be willing to make the sacrifice for science? Its his/her life that could give researchers answers, but the doctors don't have to suffer through it.
So people have to live against their will for scientific breakthroughs? You know I think slave masters would've loved their slaves not to commit suicide and continue their lives in servitude. That'd would've been really convenient.
Actually i think so yes. But unless they volunteer i belief they should be spared from the excruciating dying pains.
WELL, i have a rare form of MS(multiple sclerosis) and right now i'm laying in a bed all day.i've got one arm active so i've stayed sane with reading on the net (TY NU).it'd be sad to leave my family. i'm not in pain but do you see a cure anytime soon? i don't. so why not let me have my family around, let me say good-bye, and give me the needle already. i'll either go to Hell or be put into the re-incarnation cycle. another ride on the merry-go-round. maybe next time will be better.
Tough choices and decisions need to be made for a better future. Entertaining the idea of "the right to die" is a form of negative encouragement for those who lost the will to live.
There's quite a lot of conditions that can lower peoples morales and send them into depressive thoughts but for the most part said thoughts are temporary. Actual depression do not equal to actual suicides being carried out so it's just logical you should not help people to suicide (arguably it is a form of murder). Let the suicidal do their own thing.