Will Euthanasia ever be legal for humans?

[LoraJ]

I just can never understand why it's the humane thing to do when an animal is suffering. But when a human is suffering, and in so much pain and screaming out every single day for God to take them already, why do they have to continue to suffer?

When filling out my boyfriend's dad's living will, I noticed this paragraph:
Euthanasia. It is my intent and direction that any person making
decisions pursuant to this Directive shall have all powers available under the law
as it now exists or as it may be expanded by statute or case law including but not
limited to any rights regarding euthanasia in order to effectuate my wishes that
my life not be prolonged when its quality is diminished and that I die with dignity
without unnecessary pain and suffering. I direct that upon my request or upon the
request of any Attorney-In-Fact designated by me with the power to make health
care decisions, that my physician provide aid in dying so that I might die in a
dignified, painless and humane manner.


Do you think it may be a possibility in the future? Is it because the doctor in essence is commiting murder that in may never be legal?

 

[KelNottAt]

My grandmother died according to the terms of her living will (no feeding tube) 6 months ago. While it was hard to watch, it was definitely better for her and the rest of the family.

To answer your question, I doubt euthanasia will become legal, let alone common place, in my life time. I just can't see our society allowing one person to cause the death of another, even at the decedent's request.

I think assisted suicide would be accepted before euthanasia. I'd be in favor of laws allowing that.

 

[mrsltg]

I sure hope it won't be legal. Doctors should first "do no harm" and euthanasia falls under that. However, I also think we as a society need to re-examine our feelings on death. Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should. Keeping someone comfortable should be the goal, not using every available avenue for "cure" even when you know there's no way it will ever work. A good example would be keeping someone "alive" by vent when there is no way there will ever be a recovery. Clearly it's not harming them to disconnect the machine and let them die. My opposition is to overt acts and Physician Assisted Suicide.

I read a very interesting article last week on the issue. Apparently in the Netherlands PAS is legal. Something like 40% of the patients had never consented or even indicated they were interested. Further, parents could decide on behalf of their children (and we're not talking a DNR here) and have them given a lethal dose of medication. I find this incredibly disturbing. Instead of encouraging quality end of life care, end of life is encouraged. The author of the article points out the burden this puts on the poor vs. the rich. The rich don't have to worry about how the cost of long term care will effect their families. Instead, the poor are offered an option that costs the equivalent of $35. I agree with the author.

I am very much of the opinion that everyone needs to determine their own path and shouldn't be told what to do. My primary concern is letting other people encourage you to take a drastic step as well as involving someone else in that step. Also, I feel that instead of researching and improving palliative care this would be hiding behind an easy solution.

 

[escape]

I watched my father suffer a horrible death. He begged me to call Dr. Kevorkian. Of course, I couldn't do it. I know that had my dad been able to make that call himself, he would have done so or he would have taken other measures to end his pain.

I never thought I would be for euthanasia. I'm still not convinced it is the right thing to do for humans but I know in my dad's case and many similar cases, it might not be such a bad thing.

 

[NewJersey]

I think it should be up to the person, and not the government or the doctor. I know if I was suffering and on a feeding tube, or in a vegetable state, I'd want to be taken off support. That's my wish and don't believe the doctor should have a say, and the government for sure shouldn't.

 

[SandraVB79]

It IS legal in my country.
Now they are trying to put law together that makes it legal for kids too.

 

[ead79]

I think this is a tough issue in terms of not wanting to watch those we love suffer. However, I am against physician assisted suicide and euthanasia. mrstlg said it well.

 

[hiwaygal]

I think it should be up to the person, and not the government or the doctor. I know if I was suffering and on a feeding tube, or in a vegetable state, I'd want to be taken off support. That's my wish and don't believe the doctor should have a say, and the government for sure shouldn't.

It should be up to the individual.

 

[Disney Doll]

Well, some would say it is being done in this country, but we do it under the guise of "pain relief".

I agree that our handling of death in the USA is not good. Iti s seen as something to be avoided at all costs. For that matter, aging is seen as something to be avoided at all costs...otherwise why would the plastic surgeons be making so much $$, and why would there be so many people walking around with grotesquely enormous breasts and ridiculously stretched faces?

Palliative care is a fairly new concept in my area, and it is a wonderful one!!!!!! Palliative care specialists help the person die with dignity and comfort, help the fmaily accept the death of the person, help everyone realize that death is a part of life.

But it still make sme wonder...what happened along the way to make death such a taboo subject, such a thing to avoid? It wasn't always like this. I know medical technology and the ability to keep people alive longer has contributed to this, but when did it change to keeping people alive at all costs, to the same futile end? Is it because society as a whole is less faith oriented...and I don't just mean Christian since many faiths have a concept of some type of "life" after death...and therefore "afraid" to die?

It makes for interesting discussion and food for thought.

 

[Disney Doll]

I sure hope it won't be legal. Doctors should first "do no harm" and euthanasia falls under that.

There are some whowould argue that more "harm" is done keeping someone alive with machines who shouldn't be alive, or would not be alive if it were not for the mechanical support.

"Harm" is a subjective opinion.

 

[crz4mm2]

My Dad died of non Hodgekin's lymphoma 12 years ago. His last days were not nice. He wanted to die at home, but at the end, had so much trouble breathing, was brought to the hospital. I went so far as to ask the PA how much morphine it would take to end his suffering (the PA would not give me the dosage info). I don't think I would have been able to do it anyway, but I sure considered it.
He was on a morphine drip for pain relief at the end. It is a horrible way to die.
Dignity? I didn't see any dignity in his death.
I would certainly vote for euthanasia.

 

[mrsltg]

There are some whowould argue that more "harm" is done keeping someone alive with machines who shouldn't be alive, or would not be alive if it were not for the mechanical support.

"Harm" is a subjective opinion.

Keep reading the rest of what I said in that paragraph.

 

[SandraVB79]

For as far as I know about (never really informed about the procedure since I haven't needed it yet) you must:
- Be at least 18
- Still have a "healthy mind" I am not sure these are the right words, but they want to avoid that children of old people that have alzheimer or so "kill" their parents. It's also to avoid euthanasia on handicapped.
- Two different doctors must confirm they are in a situation that is life-threatening. (to avoid suicide by depressed people)
- The patient must have asked for it by himself two times. Also to avoid people with bad intents "kill" other people legally.

There are more regulations about the whole thing, but as I said, I you aren't confronted with it, you don't know all the little details.

I think it's good we have it. And it's not because it exists that you HAVE to use it, just like with abortion, birth control, ... It exists for those that want it, there are other solutions for those that don't want it (like paliative care).

Also, I am not afraid to die. But I am afraid to suffer. Really. Big time.
That is also why there is now a movement about euthanasia for kids. Many children that have cancer or some other horrible, life-threatening disease talked about it. First of all, they are way more mature than other children from their age. Next to that, they realize very well what is happening to the, and they are able to make such a decision. I am not quite sure what that law will look like, we'll see.
In the meanwhile, I'm glad I live in a country that allows everyone the freedom to choose, without the risk that your loved ones, that are left behind, will need to do something illegal, a crime, because they care about you. Caring is also letting go...

 

[Maleficent13]

Doctors should first "do no harm" and euthanasia falls under that. *snip* Clearly it's not harming them to disconnect the machine and let them die.

Out of curiousity, please explain the difference as to why one is "harmful" and one is not?

 

[Disney Doll]

Keep reading the rest of what I said in that paragraph.

I did, and I agree with you for the most part.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

It will become legal when people cannot sue doctors or hospitals.

 

[pearlieq]

This one has always befuddled me too, especially after adopting pets.

Why is it such an accepted part of animal guardianship that you will "put down" an animal when its quality of life has become unlivable, to the point where you would be judged (rightly) to be a bad person if you allowed it to languish in pain with no hope of significant recovery, but we insist on making humans suffer every last horrible moment, even when there is no hope of recovery and it's an incredible drain of the family's resources.

I don't get it at all. I would certainly like the option if the time comes...

 

[PaulaSB12]

I don't know how it works in Belgium, but in Holland over 1000 people a year are killed without their permision. Either they are in a coma or are deemed not mentally compitant to make the decision, they will even terminate a life if the person is suffering from depression and not a terminally ill person. Even physically disabled children are being denied anything but pallitive care til they die. I am sorry but after Doctor Harold Shipman (uk) a general doctor decided that he had the right to kill over 200 of his patients I would NOT give this power to any doctor.

 

[mrsltg]

Out of curiousity, please explain the difference as to why one is "harmful" and one is not?

I am against the idea of a doctor providing you with an overdose, telling you how to do it, suggesting you should do it. Disconnecting a respirator when a person is brain dead and can't breath on their own is a lot different (as an example). As I said in my first paragraph - there is a HUGE difference between "Could we" and "should we". Again, I feel that the focus should be on end of life care as opposed to ending life. Doctors need to be able to prescribe appropriate doses of pain medication (without fear of the DEA knocking on their door) and, IMO, take continuing education courses in pain management. I agree with others- you shouldn't have to suffer.

The PP brings up a good point. She speaks of draining a family's resources. People shouldn't have to die to preserve a family's resources. This goes back to my original post of rich vs. poor. The idea that poor people could/would be encouraged to take a lethal dose of something to spare their family finances is abhorrent. I don't think government health care will cure this either. We talk about HMO's looking at the bottom line. If the choice is $100 (just picking a number) for an overdose or $10,000 on hospice care, I don't want someone steered toward the cheaper alternative by a bean counter.

 

[pearlieq]

And I wouldn't want my estate bankrupted while I'm languishing away in a moment-by-moment hell.

I'd rather move on and pass my gifts on to my family. To me that's just another part of the insult. Take away everything I've worked for in order to keep me "alive" and in horrible pain with only death as relief.

No thanks. Not for me.