Euthanasia?

[Avatar]

Whether or not the problem is temporary, it's a moot point because of the permanence of the solution. One thing is sure...after suicide, the person will never be depressed again.

--A

[sgt.null]

May be, but I'm not arrogant enough to tell someone they can't off themselves. I will tell them why they shouldn't.

you tell them it is against the law. that isn't arrogance. it is the fact.

[Avatar]

Who cares what the law says about it? The law doesn't get to choose how or why I live or die. The law doesn't have to live my life, and it has no place telling me what I can or cannot do with it.

--A

[sgt.null]

really? rob any banks lately?

[variol son]

Ok, I'm going to way in on this one (gods only know why).

is this man's desire to die a by product of his injury? would he want to die if he was injury-free? isn't his death wish a condition of circumstance? I would argue that he isn't in a place to judge this issue. he should get therapy and see if there is an underlying depression, proving that he isn't in the right frame to make this decision.

What difference does it actually make, in terms of allowing euthanasia, whether the person asking for death is depressed or not?

Let's say that this man from Italy gets therapy and is found to be clinically depressed. So? He still can't walk or talk or eat or shit or make love to a woman (or man) or do much of anything else. Everything that many people associate with having a high quality of life is lost to him, regardless of whether or not he is depressed.

As for suicide, I like Cail's line on this one - tell people that they shouldn't but not that they can't. Yes, I know that the law says suicide is illegal, but we're hardly going to try someone by jury for attempted suicide. At least not in NZ.

Besides, if we don't allow depressed folks to suicide, shouldn't we also be stopping them from having children? We don't let them end their own lives, why should they be allowed to ruin the life of another?

[sgt.null]

because if his mind is not clear, his thinking not entirely his own, how can you say that in a rational mind that is what he would choose?

i would advocate therapy and meds.

and your list taken individually would hold a lot of people. so she we advocate offing onself for any of the listed?

and since you don't believe that a person's suicide would impact some family member in a negative way, why would his continued living?

[variol son]

I get the feeling sarge that you are intimating that a rational mind would never choose death when in fact you personally wouldn't choose death.

Someone with nothing to do but think would probably have a lot of time to consider every option. They may not make their decision rationally, because most important human decisions aren't made that way, but that doesn't mean their decision is born soley out of depression.

Also, advocating therapy and meds for someone who can't move at all is a little patronizing. What are we hoping to do - convince them to be happy about the fact that their body is a prison?

As for my list, it was actually a list of the specific things the man in question can't do, as I'm sure you knew, and not a list of individual things that should allow for euthanasia.

Finally, I am quite aware that a persons suicide negatively impacts many people. However, it does not physically harm anyone else. I know from personal experience that the sadness of losing a loved one to suicide can be overcome.

[Avatar]

Good post Vs.

And I'm talking about my life Sgt. Not actions which are to the detriment of others.

--A

[sgt.null]

Av: your death would be a detriment to your family and friends. especially if it ended in such a selfish, irrational manner.

vs: of course a rational mind would never choose suicide. it is the abandonment of hope. if the pain of losing one to suicide can be overcome by others, the pain of living can be overcome by the individual.

[Cail]

Bunk.

We all (ultimately) live lives for ourselves. No one can make us feel anything, just as we can't make anyone else feel anything.

[Cameraman Jenn]

I think if my family member was in the same situation as that guy in Italy and was staying alive only because he was afraid to cause ME pain by suiciding I would feel horrible guilt for making him suffer. Seriously, if you are miserable and staying alive to please other people then what is the point? Then you are all just miserable.

[The Laughing Man]

I highly doubt if sgtnull could not move, speak or feel anything he would want to live. But thats only my over-reaching opinion.

[sgt.null]

and it is wrong esmer. it is not for me to end my life.

[The Laughing Man]

and it is wrong for you to make that assumption for others. It is, after all, just another man's opinion you adhere to.

[sgt.null]

and it is wrong for you to make that assumption for others. It is, after all, just another man's opinion you adhere to.

no.

[Cameraman Jenn]

yes.

[DukkhaWaynhim]

I think it would be irresponsible and morally bankrupt to let someone commit suicide without repeatedly presenting them with some realistic & reasonable options - including counseling and meds, if determined necessary.

But in the (assumedly rare) cases where adults that can be reasonably proven to be in their right mind, that after counseling, advice, and pleas by others to choose a different path, if someone still opts to end their own life, and they can do so without physically or materially endangering the lives of others, I don't see the legal basis for restraining that legally-sane person from doing so.

Keep it illegal to deter the foolish, and certainly don't allow people to make insurance money off it, but let it happen. Is it morally wrong? Yes. Should someone be physically or chemically restrained from exercising a choice that has no bearing on any other person but themself? I say no, as long as it can be proven that the person is of otherwise sound mind - I will agree with Sarge to the extent that we should at least initially question the 'sound-ness' of the mind of someone contemplating suicide - it isn't natural, and should never be undertaken lightly - but the Italian man seems to be aware that he has options - he just doesn't like them.

DW

[Warmark]

May be, but I'm not arrogant enough to tell someone they can't off themselves. I will tell them why they shouldn't.

you tell them it is against the law. that isn't arrogance. it is the fact.

Do you think they are going to care if they are dead?

If i was thinking about killing myself, the fact that its against the law wouldnt matter in the least.

[Cameraman Jenn]

Good Point Warmark!!!

[Cail]

I think we can all agree that the law is foolish, and no one has ever been prosecuted for successfully committing suicide.

Look, I'm not advocating people offing themselves over traffic infractions, but in certain cases (like the Italian man's), how on earth can I tell him that life's worth living when I can move and walk and screw? It probably wouldn't mean much to him.