- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Assisted Suicide, why are people so against it?
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:07 pm to Darth_Vader
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:07 pm to Darth_Vader
If someone wants to die, and they can reason why they should then let them...
If someone is sick and suffering, or maybe they are sick and they just don't want to suffer, then let them go.
If someone is sick and suffering, or maybe they are sick and they just don't want to suffer, then let them go.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:09 pm to tduecen
quote:
If someone wants to die, and they can reason why they should then let them...
If someone is sick and suffering, or maybe they are sick and they just don't want to suffer, then let them go.
If they have a painful terminal illness, yes. They should have the option. Outside of that, no it shouldn't be an option.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:10 pm to tduecen
quote:
Posted by tduecen If someone wants to die, and they can reason why they should then let them... If someone is sick and suffering, or maybe they are sick and they just don't want to suffer, then let them go.
I agree 100%. If they want to die, let them go. But don't involve the state.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:12 pm to tduecen
People need to read up on the Oregon law and just see how heavily regulated it is.
People just can't ask for the suicide medicine. It is a really tough process that above all requires a terminal illness.
People just can't ask for the suicide medicine. It is a really tough process that above all requires a terminal illness.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:12 pm to Henry Jones Jr
quote:I think they should, is it selfish? Probably but many people just can not cope with certain things. Now maybe they should do the whole wait a year like divorce to see if it is really what someone wants rather than making a rash decision but still.
Outside of that, no it shouldn't be an option.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:13 pm to tduecen
quote:
I think they should, is it selfish? Probably but many people just can not cope with certain things. Now maybe they should do the whole wait a year like divorce to see if it is really what someone wants rather than making a rash decision but still.
State shouldn't be involved in any way unless it's a terminal illness IMO.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:13 pm to tduecen
Giving someone enough morphine (or similar) to die comfortably is fairly noncontroversial, and pain management is a major part of hospice care. Giving someone enough to end their life, though, has some valid points from each side. Firstly, the Hippocratic Oath starts with, "First, do no harm..."
Stopping a patient from breathing permanently could definitely be considered harm. On the other hand, allowing someone to suffer through their ultimate end from a tough, chronic illness could also be considered harm, mainly from an emotional/psychological standpoint. In the end, the vast majority of people fall somewhere in between the two, and the majority of hospice care is geared aggressive comfort measures. As to the bitter end of the patient with a particularly painful terminal illness and giving them enough of a medication with that it cuts their "life" short a few minutes/hours, at that point, I believe the majority of people fall on the side of believing that to be ethical. As to allowing terminally ill patients to elect to end their life before the suffering begins/peaks, I think it's just too controversial a subject to have a consensus opinion on, and the ethical debate of whether all life is worth living and has value comes into play. Again, there are rather valid points from both sides. I don't think they'll come together in those opinions, either.
Stopping a patient from breathing permanently could definitely be considered harm. On the other hand, allowing someone to suffer through their ultimate end from a tough, chronic illness could also be considered harm, mainly from an emotional/psychological standpoint. In the end, the vast majority of people fall somewhere in between the two, and the majority of hospice care is geared aggressive comfort measures. As to the bitter end of the patient with a particularly painful terminal illness and giving them enough of a medication with that it cuts their "life" short a few minutes/hours, at that point, I believe the majority of people fall on the side of believing that to be ethical. As to allowing terminally ill patients to elect to end their life before the suffering begins/peaks, I think it's just too controversial a subject to have a consensus opinion on, and the ethical debate of whether all life is worth living and has value comes into play. Again, there are rather valid points from both sides. I don't think they'll come together in those opinions, either.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:26 pm to tduecen
Because they are afraid they will abuse the privilege.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:27 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
Posted by GetCocky11 People need to read up on the Oregon law and just see how heavily regulated it is. People just can't ask for the suicide medicine. It is a really tough process that above all requires a terminal illness.
It's not what the law says that's a problem, it's that the law exists in the first place. Like I said above, giving the state any say so in people dying for any reason other than being convicted of a capital offense is a terrible idea. This is a power we never should give the state. I'm sure the Oregon law is very logical and well laid out. But it sets a precedent that puts the state into a position to be involved in decisions it should never be involved in.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:39 pm to Sl4m
quote:
You've never posted a logical thought on any subject that I've read on TD, yet you try so hard to be an insider.
I don't know you nor do I care to. I posted something logical right above here. If you want to discuss it, feel free. If you want to talk about each other's moms, let's just skip straight to that.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:42 pm to tduecen
Quite frankly if that's what they want to do then it really shouldn't be my business whether they do it. I don't have any problem with setting parameters for allowing it (i.e. Psych evaluation, multiple doctor's assessments, etc). But as far as morally, that's not my burden to carry.
I know if it was a family member that was suffering I'd want them to have that legal choice.
I know if it was a family member that was suffering I'd want them to have that legal choice.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:47 pm to tduecen
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/14/16 at 7:40 pm
Posted on 11/27/14 at 4:50 pm to Master of Sinanju
quote:
Ive always thought more people should try it.
My vote for "Excellent Post of the Year"
Posted on 11/27/14 at 5:01 pm to the808bass
.
This post was edited on 11/29/14 at 10:05 am
Posted on 11/27/14 at 5:13 pm to Sl4m
I must have hurt your feelings. Sorry about that. You can sit with me at lunch next week.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 5:13 pm to tduecen
People who support legislative measures against assisted suicide for the terminally ill, are disgusting human beings. It's hard to imagine someone would be that evil, but there are plenty of people out there that are.
If you don't support assisted suicide, fine, don't participate, but don't take that option away from someone who is suffering with a terminal illness.
If you don't support assisted suicide, fine, don't participate, but don't take that option away from someone who is suffering with a terminal illness.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 5:18 pm to GetCocky11
Assisted suicide is very easy, 18 wheeler, train, or go to a public place with a firearm and start waving it around, there will be "assistance" there soon. No reply needed, I know that I'm being a smart arse.
Besides the fact those actions are illegal, dangerous to others and will impact peoples lives, suicide alone is illegal. Nobody wants to see a person suffer through a terminal illness, but where do we/government draw the line?
Also, there seems to be a double standard imo if someone is on life support and has a living will to allow doctors to pull the plug isn't that almost the same, almost?
Besides the fact those actions are illegal, dangerous to others and will impact peoples lives, suicide alone is illegal. Nobody wants to see a person suffer through a terminal illness, but where do we/government draw the line?
Also, there seems to be a double standard imo if someone is on life support and has a living will to allow doctors to pull the plug isn't that almost the same, almost?
Posted on 11/27/14 at 5:19 pm to ZZTIGERS
quote:
People who support legislative measures against assisted suicide for the terminally ill, are disgusting human beings. It's hard to imagine someone would be that evil, but there are plenty of people out there that are.
If you don't support assisted suicide, fine, don't participate, but don't take that option away from someone who is suffering with a terminal illness.
You know folks off themselves literally daily without any "legislative measures", right?
Posted on 11/27/14 at 5:20 pm to ZZTIGERS
Those people just know better as to what's right for that individual than the individual him/herself.
Posted on 11/27/14 at 5:36 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
You know folks off themselves literally daily without any "legislative measures", right?
You know I said people who support denying assisted suicide via laws, right? If it were up to me, there would be no legislative means needed. If a terminally ill person needed help ending their lives, the person assisting would be immune to prosecution.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News