17 year old granted euthanasia in Belgium

drunkmonkey

Not sure whether this is a win for freedom or sad day for humanity.

Belgium allows 17yr old to kill herself.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN11N09P?il=0

Nonoperational

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Not sure whether this is a win for freedom or sad day for humanity.

Belgium allows 17yr old to kill herself.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN11N09P?il=0

Did you actually read the article?

"To undergo euthanasia, the minor must also be in a "terminal medical situation with constant and unbearable physical pain which cannot be assuaged and that will cause death in the short term", the law says."

It has nothing to do with depression, I don't understand where you're going with this at all.

Kilboor

I don't think it was depression ....

Osgoodisgood

read the article OP?

Overheal

Some US states allow humanitarian euthanasia. I think WA and OR do anyway. Been a while since I bothered to read into it.

GLaDOS

Disgusting thread title

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Disgraceful thread title. It was a terminal medical condition. At least get your facts right before you jump in. Deplorable.

drunkmonkey

Kilboor wrote: »

I don't think it was depression ....

I'd guessed that much, was just putting some medical problem on it.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'd guessed that much, was just putting some medical problem on it.

You mean making up the story yourself?

drunkmonkey

Bodhi High Rose wrote: »

Disgraceful thread title. It was a terminal medical condition. At least get your facts right before you jump in. Deplorable.

Just saw rage after readin 3/4 article, on mobile can't change the heading but literally stick in any medical problem in the title as that's what I meant.

Penny Tration

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'd guessed that much, was just putting some medical problem on it.

You think it's funny to take the piss out of mentally ill people and terminally ill people? Cause that's what you've just done with your nasty title.

drunkmonkey

Penny Tration wrote: »

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'd guessed that much, was just putting some medical problem on it.

You think it's funny to take the piss out of mentally ill people and terminally ill people? Cause that's what you've just done with your nasty title.

No I don't, the title was meant to be tounge and cheek not a pop at people with depression, it's was sarcasim/dark humour.
Will I change it to cancer or would I be having a go at them as well.
The thread was meant to be about the story not the title.

K.Flyer

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'd guessed that much, was just putting some medical problem on it.

So you admit it was an inconsiderate and inappropriate thread title.
if you are going to comment on a very sensitive subject at least go to the trouble of fully reading the article and not make up thread titles with whatever you think fits in with your presumptions

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

drunkmonkey wrote: »

No I don't, the title was meant to be tounge and cheek not a pop at people with depression, it's was sarcasim/dark humour.
Will I change it to cancer or would I be having a go at them as well.
The thread was meant to be about the story not the title.

You clearly and deliberately said depression and suicide. It was neither. It was a terminal illness and not suicide. The euthanasia was carried out by a doctor.

Only reading 3/4 of the article is no excuse whatsoever.

Dark humour? Yes, right!

Skylinehead

Mod: Utterly ridiculous thread title changed.

super_furry

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'd guessed that much, was just putting some medical problem on it.

You could try reading the articles you post then.

Grayson

I feel like I missed out by not seeing the original thread title.

drunkmonkey

K.Flyer wrote: »

So you admit it was an inconsiderate and inappropriate thread title.
if you are going to comment on a very sensitive subject at least go to the trouble of fully reading the article and not make up thread titles with whatever you think fits in with your presumptions

I've it changed, I didn't make any presumption about the illness, pure click bait nothing more.

This shhh there may be somene with depression about is a bit much though and how dare I use the word in jest, we can't be walking on egg shells, it's a major issue, heard of 2 locally in the last 48hrs, it's out of control.

drunkmonkey

Skylinehead wrote: »

Mod: Utterly ridiculous thread title changed.

In hindsight that's probably the title I should have ran with.

Panthro

OP you gone done real bad thing.
First rule of thread club read storyline fully before starting a thread about it.
We'll forgive you this time but don't do it again

lertsnim

What was the original thread title?

degsie

lertsnim wrote: »

What was the original thread title?

"This woman had to give up the Internet because of her fat fingers, at first you will be shocked, then you'll be inspired"

eviltwin

Back to the issue at hand 17 is hardly a child and I don't see anything wrong with the decision.

drunkmonkey

eviltwin wrote: »

Back to the issue at hand 17 is hardly a child and I don't see anything wrong with the decision.

Your right but outlooks change, she may have had a completely different perspective at 27.
I don't think 17yr olds have the slightest notion of what life has in store for them, you could apply that to a lot of 30yr old as well.
I don't think it should be an option if there is any hope.

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Your right but outlooks change, she may have had a completely different perspective at 27.
I don't think 17yr olds have the slightest notion of what life has in store for them, you could apply that to a lot of 30yr old as well.
I don't think it should be an option if there is any hope.

Jesus Christ. Would you go and fuking learn what a terminal illness is instead of shltposting on here?

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Your right but outlooks change, she may have had a completely different perspective at 27.
I don't think 17yr olds have the slightest notion of what life has in store for them, you could apply that to a lot of 30yr old as well.
I don't think it should be an option if there is any hope.

It doesn't say anywhere in the article about it being anything to do with "different perspective". It doesn't go into any detail about why the decision was granted, as far as I can see and, honestly, we don't need to know.

A psychologist or physician gave the go ahead and the parents gave their permission.

It has nothing to do with "change of perspective".

There is obviously something incredibly wrong that a "change of perspective" won't fix, because I doubt any parent would willingly give permission to their child to end their lives if it was something that could be solved/fixed/whatever else.

Samaris

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Your right but outlooks change, she may have had a completely different perspective at 27.
I don't think 17yr olds have the slightest notion of what life has in store for them, you could apply that to a lot of 30yr old as well.
I don't think it should be an option if there is any hope.

I take it the term "short-term terminal illness" hasn't actually sunk in yet, yes? The implication is not that she might have changed her mind at 27, it's that she certainly wouldn't be -alive- at 27.

Daft thread.

K.Flyer

"drunkmonkey wrote: »

This shhh there may be somene with depression about is a bit much though and how dare I use the word in jest, we can't be walking on egg shells, it's a major issue, heard of 2 locally in the last 48hrs, it's out of control

One of the longest running threads on boards....

Lets All Laugh At People With Depression

The reason you got flamed was because the subject matter had nothing to do with depression, which I agree is a serious problem in this country, as is suicide. But that is a discussion for a different thread.

GLaDOS

Dig up, OP

drunkmonkey

True that's the last thing a parent will do.

Eimee90

drunkmonkey wrote:

Your right but outlooks change, she may have had a completely different perspective at 27. I don't think 17yr olds have the slightest notion of what life has in store for them, you could apply that to a lot of 30yr old as well. I don't think it should be an option if there is any hope.

The facts are the person in question fitted the bill of being in terrible pain, which would shortly lead to their death with no relief. Presuming she made it to 27, what type of life would she have.

endacl

Terribly sad situation to be in. I hope the family find peace.

Pro Hoc Vice

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Your right but outlooks change, she may have had a completely different perspective at 27.
I don't think 17yr olds have the slightest notion of what life has in store for them, you could apply that to a lot of 30yr old as well.
I don't think it should be an option if there is any hope.

Did you read the article at all.

donegal.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Not sure whether this is a win for freedom or sad day for humanity.

definitely a win for both freedom and humanity

uck51js9zml2yt

Read the article. All it says is that the doctor reported the event and it gives the reason why it's allowed.

The whole thing raises the question about whether assisted suicide is right.
In my mind it's not.
As a society we have an abhorrence to suicide. Why is asssited suicide different?

The Princess Bride

drunkmonkey wrote: »

No I don't, the title was meant to be tounge and cheek not a pop at people with depression, it's was sarcasim/dark humour.
Will I change it to cancer or would I be having a go at them as well.
The thread was meant to be about the story not the title.

Tongue and cheek? Sarcasm?

All I can say is I sincerely hope you never ever have to sit and watch a loved one or friend die from a terminal illness.
There's absolutely nothing humorous about it.

Samaris

The Princess Bride wrote: »

Tongue and cheek? Sarcasm?

All I can say is I sincerely hope you never ever have to sit and watch a loved one or friend die from a terminal illness.
There's absolutely nothing humorous about it.

Yiiis, I'm not sure why the OP thought that -improved- what they were saying.

Guy:Incognito

Using a phrase and getting it wrong can only make the situation worse anyway.

Tongue in cheek.

captbarnacles

Justin Many Warrior wrote: »

Read the article. All it says is that the doctor reported the event and it gives the reason why it's allowed.

The whole thing raises the question about whether assisted suicide is right.
In my mind it's not.
As a society we have an abhorrence to suicide. Why is asssited suicide different?

So someone in the final stages of ALS or MS and who cannot physically commit suicide should just have to suffer to the end?

Beyond cruel.

HS3

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Not sure whether this is a win for freedom or sad day for humanity.

Belgium allows 17yr old to kill herself.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN11N09P?il=0

Seems pretty humane to me. Seems as though a minor is allowed avail of assisted suicide if they suffer from a terminal illness causing them unbearable pain. I'm assuming, because the article doesn't say that she ticked all the boxes. Very sad situation.

All for euthanasia. I saw a programme on it, think it might have been Terry Pratchet who did it. It was based in Switzerland. A lot of downsides to it, person has to be of sound mind and able to take the medicine themselves, so it's all done before the illness they're seeking to escape fully takes hold. Which is completely understandable, it just means the person misses out on a few good years too.

One of the guys on the programme wasn't physically ill, but was suicidal and his take in it was, there you died in comfort and with others around you rather than the violence of any other option.

I found it all very interesting and would love to see it brought in here.

Roger Hassenforder

Justin Many Warrior wrote: »

The whole thing raises the question about whether assisted suicide is right.
In my mind it's not.
As a society we have an abhorrence to suicide. Why is asssited suicide different?

I have a greater abhorrence to "constant and unbearable physical pain which cannot be assuaged and that will cause death in the short term"

But that's just me.

Poor Uncle Tom

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Not sure whether this is a win for freedom or sad day for humanity.

Belgium allows 17yr old to kill herself.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN11N09P?il=0

There are plenty of stories in the media you can get outraged about, this isn't one of them.

This is tragic, unfortunate, extremely sad and deserves sympathy and empathy, not outrage.

seamus

Justin Many Warrior wrote: »

The whole thing raises the question about whether assisted suicide is right.
In my mind it's not.
As a society we have an abhorrence to suicide. Why is asssited suicide different?

We abhor suicide because we see it as a terrible waste of human potential. "A permanent solution to a temporary problem", etc.

We accept that everyone dies eventually -when their time comes - but any death which is avoidable is a tragedy - a lifetime of happiness and humanity lost before it should have been.

But unavoidable death, while still.mourned and sad, is accepted as being the end of the road. A lifetime lived. And that's regardless of whether you die at 7 or 107. It's "your time" and that's it. We all take a ticket when we're born and our number will be called someday.

Assisted suicide is simply about allowing the individual to control not the time of their death, but the manner of it. Once you have that diagnosis, you're basically already dead. Its a waiting game for your body to crap out on you. So why wait?

It's often presented as a controversial topic, but I don't actually think it is. I believe that the majority of people would like to have the freedom to choose where and when they die, and to do it dignified and legally. At a referendum I believe it would pass with a massive majority.