Assisted suicide for depression - Have we gone too far?

Archive From The 'Tank
lorin
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 3492
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 2:28 am
Been thanked: 1 time

Assisted suicide for depression - Have we gone too far?

Post by lorin »

Assisted suicide for depression - have we gone too far? I believe in assisted suicide for those with a terminal illness. Then last year I watched a documentary on the assisted suicide of a woman with a chronic disease that felt she had no quality of life. And now this..................... I think it is a dangerous step the Dutch take here.
The Dutch Debate Doctor-Assisted Suicide For Depression
A controversial new clinic that helps the chronically depressed end their lives has The Netherlands wrestling with state-mandated euthanasia.
In 2001 the Dutch legalized euthanasia. Their law, which went into effect in 2002, allowed doctors to end the lives of their patients in the context of a state health care system that emphasized close consultation with family physicians over many years. The termination of life was supposed to be limited to those with “unbearable and hopeless suffering” whose mental faculties were not impaired and who had no other hope of relief.

But recent revelations about the way euthanasia is practiced by one group in The Netherlands, especially for those suffering from psychiatric illnesses, is making even the Dutch feel uncomfortable. The new debate raises questions about the way appointed commissions judge these life-ending practices, and echoes the kinds of ‘slippery-slope’ criticisms often made by right-wing and religious parties in the United States.

Under the Dutch law, the patient must ask repeatedly to die, a second doctor has to agree in writing that euthanasia is justified, and the post-mortem panel made up of a doctor, a jurist and an ethical expert have to confirm that the legal requirements were met. Although the 2002 law always left open the possibility that psychological pain could be sufficient justification for euthanasia, the focus was on those suffering from terminal cancer and similar excruciating physical conditions.

Ten years passed, and practices evolved. In early 2012 a group called the Life-Ending Clinic went into operation for people whose personal physicians refused to terminate their lives or assist their suicides. The clinic has since tested the boundaries of “unbearable suffering.” Among those it has helped to die: people with chronic depression and those who have signed their own euthanasia declaration in the early stages of dementia.

“We consider it self-evident that someone who is terminal can turn to euthanasia,” Life-Ending Clinic Director Steven Pleiter told The Daily Beast. “Now we are entering a phase in which there will be more debate about patients who are not terminally ill, among them psychiatric patients and those with dementia.”

Last year 749 people came to the Life-Ending Clinic with a euthanasia request, of which 133 were granted. Some of the clinic’s numbers are significantly higher than the national average. In its own press release, the clinic says: “The figures over 2013 show a strong growth of euthanasia in these groups.” Referred to are the clinic’s stats in terminating the lives of those with dementia, which totals 18 times the national average, and the psychiatric patients, which the clinic euthanized five times more often.

None of this has anything to do, directly, with Obamacare in the United States. But it does raise in bold relief the sorts of misgivings played on by right-wing politicians like Sarah Palin, who warned in 2009 that somehow “death panels” would decide who lived and who died under the Affordable Care Act. That is not the case in the United States, and PolitiFact awarded Palin’s distortions “The Lie of the Year” in 2009.

In 2012, Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum upped the ante with the outlandish claim that in the Netherlands, old folks live in terror they’ll be euthanized against their will.

“People wear different bracelets if they are elderly. And the bracelet is: ‘Do not euthanize me,’” Santorum claimed. “They have voluntary euthanasia in the Netherlands but half of the people who are euthanized—10 percent of all deaths in the Netherlands—half of those people are euthanized involuntarily at hospitals because they are older and sick. And so elderly people in the Netherlands don’t go to the hospital. They go to another country, because they are afraid, because of budget purposes, they will not come out of that hospital if they go in there with sickness.”

The Washington Post concluded its fact-checking article on that statement with the judgment, “there appears to be not a shred of evidence to back up Santorum’s claims.”

Although lawful euthanasia is best known as a Dutch phenomenon, it has been legalized in the surrounding countries of Belgium and Luxembourg as well. Just a few weeks ago, Belgium broadened its existing law to include the possibility of euthanasia for children of all ages. The amendment was made primarily to benefit terminally-ill kids. Their legal guardian has to agree and they have to be ‘of sound mind and judgment,’ but still, many view it as a slippery slope to the River Styx.

The Catholic Church is strongly opposed to the termination of any life, whether after conception, by abortion, or toward the end, through euthanasia. But proponents argue that legalizing the practice only acknowledges and regulates something that people are determined to do in any case.

Take Belgium for instance—according the World Health Organization, it has one of the highest suicide rates on earth, totaling seven daily. Proponents of assisted suicide argue that if there are no mild, medical alternatives, people are forced to find crude and often gruesome ‘solutions,’ leaving family members to face the harsh aftermath.

In the United States, four states (Oregon, Washington, Vermont and Montana) allow some form of physician-assisted suicide while 46 states have deemed it illegal.

Meanwhile, guns, which are widely and legally owned in most of the country, are the favored American means of terminating one’s own life: about 20,000 people a year shoot themselves.


Despite the rational arguments for legal euthanasia as a matter of principle, the questions now being raised in the Netherlands are about practice.

Psychiatrist Boudewijn Chabot, seen as a pioneer of the euthanasia movement after his conviction in 1991 for helping a female patient die, told the Dutch TV program Nieuwsuur that the law “has gone off the rails.”

“In the last two years things started happening that made me feel uncomfortable,” he said. Many of the Dutch have living wills stating whether they want to be euthanized or not, if they are no longer able to make the decision. But Chabot argues that a written statement made when one is of sound mind should not be considered “completely valid” for “a seriously demented person who no longer knows what it means.”

Chabot warned that the emphasis on a long-term doctor-patient relationship is paramount when it comes to evaluating psychiatric problems. “There are a 100,000 chronic psychiatric patients” in the Netherlands, according to Chabot, and of those “a large segment struggles with and against a death wish.” If the Life-Ending Clinic wants to take on such a responsibility, he said, then it better “get ready.”

In one highly publicized example last year, the clinic helped a 63-year-old man with severe psychiatric problems to end his life. After a very active career working for government, the patient in question could not face his upcoming retirement. In an interview with the Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad the clinic’s psychiatrist, Gerty Casteelen said the man “managed to convince me that it was impossible for him to go on. He was all alone in the world. He’d never had a partner. He did have family but he was not in touch with them. It was almost like he’d never developed as a person. He felt like he didn’t have the right to live. His self-hatred was all consuming.”

The man’s long-term physicians had rejected his request previously. But the clinic’s team evaluated him, read his medical history and decided it was time to close his case— permanently.

Clinic Director Pleiter thinks giving psychiatric patients a chance at assisted suicide is important. “We are dealing with a group of patients that have no other place to go, that are also being ignored by psychiatry,” he said. “We are looking at their requests seriously, we treat them in all fairness. I believe it was a deliberate choice for the lawmakers to offer space legally, to which both patients with physical as well as psychological problems can turn.”

But where does one draw the line? Because these patients are not physically ill, the evaluations of independent psychiatrists are under scrutiny. Does this mean any person suffering from serious depression can shop around until he or she finds someone willing to help with suicide? And euthanasia is not only for old people. How young can you be and still get legal help if you want to die? How far should society go to overcome the biologically inbuilt threshold that makes it hard to take one’s own life by aiding someone to do so?

The controversy surrounding the Life-Ending Clinic’s activities has caused the Dutch press to look at some of the other cases from recent years. In one particularly disturbing case a 35-year-old woman, the youngest to die since the Dutch law was introduced, got help killing herself in 2012. Excerpts of her file were published by Dutch national newspaper Trouw and read like a sad story of clinical depression. But the file also shows an extended period of hopefulness. Not enough apparently. A team of doctors decided there was no cause to wait, and ended her life.
www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/ ... ssion.html
Note - there may have been an update to the laws since February of this year.
User avatar
Cail
Lord
Posts: 38981
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 1:36 am
Location: Hell of the Upside Down Sinners

Post by Cail »

I'm all for the right to end one's life for whatever reason. I don't think that doctors should have anything to do with it, but I have no real strong position on that and could probably be swayed by a compelling argument.

But I absolutely believe in the right to die on one's own terms.
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." - PJ O'Rourke
_____________
"Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas." - Charles Stewart
_____________
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
_____________
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

Agreed--this is a personal liberty issue. It is your life and you must live it but you also retain the ability to end it whenever you wish to do so. Obtaining the assistance of a physician might make it less painful but I see no reason they would have to be consulted.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61711
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Post by Avatar »

Yep, no surprises here, I'm totally with Cail and Hashi. My life, my choice.

--A
User avatar
aliantha
blueberries on steroids
Posts: 17865
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 7:50 pm
Location: NOT opening up a restaurant in Santa Fe

Post by aliantha »

Generally speaking, I agree with you guys. And particularly so in cases of dementia, where the person is aware that he/she is losing his/her mind and there's no way to reverse the progression of the illness. If they want to give up, rather than run the medical gauntlet in order to gain another year or so of lucidity, they should have the right to choose to end it.

Depression is in a different class, I think, because a cure is possible. However, if the person has exhausted all options and is still depressed, or doesn't want to spend the rest of his/her life medicated.... I dunno. I think in that case, the person should have the choice to be done.
Image
Image

EZ Board Survivor

"Dreaming isn't good for you unless you do the things it tells you to." -- Three Dog Night (via the GI)

https://www.hearth-myth.com/
User avatar
SoulBiter
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9247
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:02 am
Has thanked: 79 times
Been thanked: 13 times

Post by SoulBiter »

aliantha wrote:Generally speaking, I agree with you guys. And particularly so in cases of dementia, where the person is aware that he/she is losing his/her mind and there's no way to reverse the progression of the illness. If they want to give up, rather than run the medical gauntlet in order to gain another year or so of lucidity, they should have the right to choose to end it.

Depression is in a different class, I think, because a cure is possible. However, if the person has exhausted all options and is still depressed, or doesn't want to spend the rest of his/her life medicated.... I dunno. I think in that case, the person should have the choice to be done.
Just to play devils advocate here. Is a person in this condition really in a mental state where they can make the right choice? Plenty of people have 'tried' to suicide and failed and look back on that as a 'dark time' in their life but they have no wish that they had succeeded.
We miss you Tracie but your Spirit will always shine brightly on the Watch Image
User avatar
Ananda
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 2453
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 3:23 pm
Location: Sweden

Post by Ananda »

SoulBiter wrote:
aliantha wrote:Generally speaking, I agree with you guys. And particularly so in cases of dementia, where the person is aware that he/she is losing his/her mind and there's no way to reverse the progression of the illness. If they want to give up, rather than run the medical gauntlet in order to gain another year or so of lucidity, they should have the right to choose to end it.

Depression is in a different class, I think, because a cure is possible. However, if the person has exhausted all options and is still depressed, or doesn't want to spend the rest of his/her life medicated.... I dunno. I think in that case, the person should have the choice to be done.
Just to play devils advocate here. Is a person in this condition really in a mental state where they can make the right choice? Plenty of people have 'tried' to suicide and failed and look back on that as a 'dark time' in their life but they have no wish that they had succeeded.
I agree. It can almost always get better unless you're dead when we're talking about depression.

I also agree that it is a person's choice. I just don't see why a doctor should be involved.
Monsters, they eat
Your kind of meat
And they're moving as far as they can
And as fast as they can
User avatar
aliantha
blueberries on steroids
Posts: 17865
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 7:50 pm
Location: NOT opening up a restaurant in Santa Fe

Post by aliantha »

Ananda wrote:
SoulBiter wrote:
aliantha wrote:Generally speaking, I agree with you guys. And particularly so in cases of dementia, where the person is aware that he/she is losing his/her mind and there's no way to reverse the progression of the illness. If they want to give up, rather than run the medical gauntlet in order to gain another year or so of lucidity, they should have the right to choose to end it.

Depression is in a different class, I think, because a cure is possible. However, if the person has exhausted all options and is still depressed, or doesn't want to spend the rest of his/her life medicated.... I dunno. I think in that case, the person should have the choice to be done.
Just to play devils advocate here. Is a person in this condition really in a mental state where they can make the right choice? Plenty of people have 'tried' to suicide and failed and look back on that as a 'dark time' in their life but they have no wish that they had succeeded.
I agree. It can almost always get better unless you're dead when we're talking about depression.
That's why I'm waffling, and why I said, "exhausted all options." Some folks won't take their meds unless you lock them up and force them to take 'em -- either they take them for a while and quit because they feel so much better, or they don't like the way the meds make them feel.

Lorin and I saw "Next to Normal" in NY a couple of years ago. The mom in that show had a different flavor of mental illness (I won't say which one, as that would be a spoiler) who stopped taking her meds at one point because they evened out her emotions to the point where she felt deadened.

Dementia, to me, is a much easier call. Knowing you're going to lose your mind to the point that you won't be yourself, you'll put a horrible emotional and physical burden on your family, and the only release is your death? I'd be sympathetic to euthanasia in a case like that.
Image
Image

EZ Board Survivor

"Dreaming isn't good for you unless you do the things it tells you to." -- Three Dog Night (via the GI)

https://www.hearth-myth.com/
User avatar
Cail
Lord
Posts: 38981
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 1:36 am
Location: Hell of the Upside Down Sinners

Post by Cail »

We should be allowed to make bad choices. We're not really free if we can't. And who are we to say to someone that suicide is a bad choice for them?

Yes, I know it sounds cold, but what other choices are we not going to allow people to make?
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." - PJ O'Rourke
_____________
"Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas." - Charles Stewart
_____________
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
_____________
User avatar
SoulBiter
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9247
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:02 am
Has thanked: 79 times
Been thanked: 13 times

Post by SoulBiter »

Cail wrote:We should be allowed to make bad choices. We're not really free if we can't. And who are we to say to someone that suicide is a bad choice for them?

Yes, I know it sounds cold, but what other choices are we not going to allow people to make?
I dont think we should make it any easier for them. If they want to commit suicide and society is going to let them, then fine. But I would disagree with assisting them on the road to death.

Robin Williams. I bet had he failed, would a year from now be telling us how stupid that was.

Also there are some drug interactions that cause suicidal thoughts, are still OK with allowing them to suicide when its another drug causing them to think this way??
We miss you Tracie but your Spirit will always shine brightly on the Watch Image
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

Perhaps if physicians weren't bribed into overmedicating everything then harmful drug interactions wouldn't be the problem it is.

Dry eyes? They have a pill for that.

Dry mouth? They have a pill for that.

Can't sleep? They have a pill for that.

Can't wake up? They have a pill for that.

Can't stay awake at work? They have a pill for that.

Need some vim and vigor or to put a pep in your step? They have a pill for that.

Need to unwind and settle down? They have a pill for that.

Your other medications make you feel weird? They have a pill for that.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
Ur Dead
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 2295
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:17 am

Post by Ur Dead »

Hashi Lebwohl wrote:Perhaps if physicians weren't bribed into overmedicating everything then harmful drug interactions wouldn't be the problem it is.

Dry eyes? They have a pill for that.

Dry mouth? They have a pill for that.

Can't sleep? They have a pill for that.

Can't wake up? They have a pill for that.

Can't stay awake at work? They have a pill for that.

Need some vim and vigor or to put a pep in your step? They have a pill for that.

Need to unwind and settle down? They have a pill for that.

Your other medications make you feel weird? They have a pill for that.
Well welcome back to the 50's & 60's (20th century)
Better life through chemicals...
What's this silver looking ring doing on my finger?
User avatar
sgt.null
Jack of Odd Trades, Master of Fun
Posts: 47250
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:53 am
Location: Brazoria, Texas
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 6 times

Post by sgt.null »

doctors should not be in the business of offing their patients. I believe they take some sort of oath against that?
Lenin, Marx
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

Part of the Hippocratic Oath is "do no harm". In some circumstances, prolonging the life of the patient is more harmful than the alternative and thus the physician should work with the patient to make their passing painless.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
SerScot
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4678
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:37 pm

Post by SerScot »

Sgt.Null,

See Hashi's post. The ethics surrounding questions of paliative care are complex and difficult. If someone is in great pain and dieing of cancer that pain can be mitigated but, very likely, at the cost of shortening, severely their life span. Should the pain meds be administered?

I'm sure you've seen Saving Private Ryan where the soldiers helped their medic to die with a morphine overdose when he was injured too badly to carry on and was a long way from any medical assistance. Were they wrong to do so?

These are the questions that come up. If somone is truely in agony from depression is it wrong for us to force them to remain in that agony? To demand that they tough it out? Is it our place as a society to take that choice from those people?

I don't care for suicide and I don't want my friends and family to choose it, but is it my place to take their choice from them?
"Futility is the defining characteristic of life. Pain is proof of existence" - Thomas Covenant
User avatar
aliantha
blueberries on steroids
Posts: 17865
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 7:50 pm
Location: NOT opening up a restaurant in Santa Fe

Post by aliantha »

What's the historical basis for the bias against suicide, anyway? I have a sense that it began as a religious proscription that became codified into law.

I'm asking because there are some societies (which we'd consider primitive) where ailing elders are encouraged, and even expected, to take the long walk into the wilderness. Some of the justification is harsh reality -- why waste precious food on someone who is going to die soon anyway? But clearly these societies don't have the same attitude toward suicide that we do. I wonder what changed, and when.
Image
Image

EZ Board Survivor

"Dreaming isn't good for you unless you do the things it tells you to." -- Three Dog Night (via the GI)

https://www.hearth-myth.com/
User avatar
Ananda
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 2453
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 3:23 pm
Location: Sweden

Post by Ananda »

SerScot wrote:Sgt.Null,

See Hashi's post. The ethics surrounding questions of paliative care are complex and difficult. If someone is in great pain and dieing of cancer that pain can be mitigated but, very likely, at the cost of shortening, severely their life span. Should the pain meds be administered?

I'm sure you've seen Saving Private Ryan where the soldiers helped their medic to die with a morphine overdose when he was injured too badly to carry on and was a long way from any medical assistance. Were they wrong to do so?

These are the questions that come up. If somone is truely in agony from depression is it wrong for us to force them to remain in that agony? To demand that they tough it out? Is it our place as a society to take that choice from those people?

I don't care for suicide and I don't want my friends and family to choose it, but is it my place to take their choice from them?
A poem on the topic from an american author who I like.

How Annandale Went Out
They called it Annandale—and I was there
To flourish, to find words, and to attend:
Liar, physician, hypocrite, and friend,
I watched him; and the sight was not so fair
As one or two that I have seen elsewhere:
An apparatus not for me to mend—
A wreck, with hell between him and the end,
Remained of Annandale; and I was there.

“I knew the ruin as I knew the man;
So put the two together, if you can,
Remembering the worst you know of me.
Now view yourself as I was, on the spot—
With a slight kind of engine. Do you see?
Like this … You wouldn’t hang me? I thought not.
- Edwin Arlington Robinson
Monsters, they eat
Your kind of meat
And they're moving as far as they can
And as fast as they can
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

aliantha wrote:What's the historical basis for the bias against suicide, anyway? I have a sense that it began as a religious proscription that became codified into law.
Christians believe that God creates life so the act of depriving a human being of their life--even if it is your own--is to commit a mortal sin against God. The ancient Hebrews even made it one of their Ten Commandments they felt so strongly about the issue. (side note for the Close: read that commandment carefully for it says "thou shalt not commit murder" not "thou shalt not kill". those are two different things)

I am not Catholic but I think suicide is one of the sins for which Catholics go to hell, go directly to hell, do not pass Purgatory, and do not collect $200. Anyone care to correct me if I am wrong?

Note, of course, that suicide is not illegal--you can't be punished or fined if you are already dead. Trying to commit suicide and failing is usually illegal.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
sgt.null
Jack of Odd Trades, Master of Fun
Posts: 47250
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:53 am
Location: Brazoria, Texas
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 6 times

Post by sgt.null »

hashi - there is only one unforgivable sin... blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=585419

I had it explained to me by a priest that most people who kill themselves must be not in their right minds, and God would not punish them for the act of suicide, if otherwise they accepted Christ.

SerScot - big difference in someone dying on the battlefield and someone suffering depression. depression can be managed through therapy and medication. we walk a very slippery slope because it all becomes a matter of degrees. and people will be killed off who could have been helped.

I do not want doctors having the power of death over their patients because it would become an out. be it for money or other reasons. if it becomes law then the state would intercede and may very well sentence people to death because they become a burden. and you know families can not be trusted with these decisions. not with money on the line.
Lenin, Marx
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
User avatar
SerScot
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4678
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:37 pm

Post by SerScot »

Sgt.Null,

Why do you and those who agree with you get to make that call for other people? What gives you (the collective you) that authority?
"Futility is the defining characteristic of life. Pain is proof of existence" - Thomas Covenant
Locked

Return to “Coercri”