Euthanasia

paleoperson

paleoperson wrote: »

That's totally false.

Can you mods please stop pretending you know it all or at least stop suggesting that you have any idea what others are talking about? I "literally just made that up out of nowhere" eh? What a stupid thing to say, you have no idea how or why I think this. It's quite a common knowledge thing, it is 100% true, many people agree. You can disagree with it all you like but to say I "literally just made it up", what are you some kind of child?

It's bad enough when a common troll does it, but to see moderators take part in this type of trolling is really jarring. I'm talking about genuine views ok? If you want to cast doubt, fine, to say I made it up is bull****.

It's you so-called "mods" that make me stop coming to this board. Not so much from being warned or anything, but by your attitude and belligerence and lack of respect for other views.

It's neither a 'common knowledge' thing, nor is it true.

Not all other views are worthy of respect.

gctest50

paleoperson wrote: »

......


Psychiatry is looked down on and often considered dodgy even by their peers in the medical community.

Any reputable source for this revelation ?

paleoperson

gctest50 wrote: »

Any reputable source for this revelation ?

Ask me for it nicely. I was about to comply but I noticed your use of the word "revelation" was quite sarcastic, so go ahead and change that.

I was accused of "literally just making it up" which is really aggravating to be told for something that is a very real conception by many and I am posting in good faith, and I should be apologized to for that.

Hotblack Desiato

BBFAN wrote: »

I really don't see why we can offer the same compassion to humans.

Because of religious bullshît and sanctimonious **** who think they know best how everyone else should live - and die.

gctest50

paleoperson wrote: »

Ask me for it nicely. I was about to comply but I noticed your use of the word "revelation" was quite sarcastic, so go ahead and change that.

I was accused of "literally just making it up" which is really aggravating to be told for something that is a very real conception by many and I am posting in good faith, and I should be apologized to for that.

If you have no reputable source n evidence for :

paleoperson wrote: »

......

Psychiatry is looked down on and often considered dodgy even by their peers in the medical community.

you are literally just making it up

1hnr79jr65

paleoperson wrote: »

Ask me for it nicely. I was about to comply but I noticed your use of the word "revelation" was quite sarcastic, so go ahead and change that.

I was accused of "literally just making it up" which is really aggravating to be told for something that is a very real conception by many and I am posting in good faith, and I should be apologized to for that.

Any chance you can share a reputable source for why the earth is flat pretty please? :rolleyes:

paleoperson

gctest50 wrote: »

If you have no reputable source n evidence for :

you are literally just making it up

What kind of logic is that? If I don't have a linkable internet source for something I must just be making it up?

I would expect more coherent thinking from a computer program designed to talk like a human.

Again, if someone asked me nicely I'd provide one. I just did a google search and was flooded with hits about this known and common perception and reputation of psychiatry.

gctest50

paleoperson wrote: »

What kind of logic is that? If I don't have a linkable internet source for something I must just be making it up?

I would expect more coherent thinking from a computer program designed to talk like a human.

Again, if someone asked me nicely I'd provide one. I just did a google search and was flooded with hits about this known and common perception and reputation of psychiatry.

If you did a google search you would have a linkable internet source that's reputable




If you can't provide a source for :

paleoperson wrote: »

......

Psychiatry is looked down on and often considered dodgy even by their peers in the medical community.

you are literally making it up

.

tastyt

A guy in my class in school, not the brightest, was given a punishment essay of 500 words on euthanasia.

He produced the 500 words on time but the teacher couldn't understand why the whole essay was about japanese teenage street style and chinese kids in workshops.

He had done 500 words on the youth in Asia.

Sardonicat

And I never to heard that one before

_Kaiser_

Anyway....

I know myself that if something ever happened to me, or just through old age, that I was unable to look after myself, or worse be a burden on my loved ones, I would want an exit option.

This also applies to living out my last few years in a home surrounded by strangers or worse, not even recognising anyone I do love. I've a great-aunt going through that now, and I watched my mother waste away in a bed strapped to oxygen machines for the last 2 years of her life and it's no way to live - it's just existing and barely at that.

I'd also apply it to life changing but otherwise survivable events like ending up in a wheelchair or going blind. I know and appreciate that there are many people who live better and more full lives than I do now, but I also know that after over 40 years here, I wouldn't adapt well to the changes.
That's just my own opinion for my own self mind. I fully accept others will disagree and that's fine too.

When my time comes I'd prefer quietly in my sleep or suddenly with as little pain (or trauma to others) as possible. But for situations like the above, ideally just an injection that puts me to sleep and that's that.

uck51js9zml2yt

Emme wrote: »

Do you not care about improving life and quality of living?

What happens when life can no longer be improved and is only an existence of suffering agony beyond belief?

I had heart surgery a few years ago. Without it I would be dead now. The last 3years have seen me go places and do things I'd never have done otherwise.

Currently I've a friend receiving palliative care in a hospital. He lives every moment fully and is thankful for that moment. In 30 years I've never once heard him complain.
He saw his wife die in her 30's. She also lived for the moment. Hers was a glorious death according to those with her even though in severe pain.

Sardonicat

When my mother was dying from cancer it had mestasdisized to her bones. It was horrific . Despite morphine she couldn't move a mm or even tolerate the slightest touch without screaming in pain. As her organs started to shut down she slipped into and out of consciousness . She basically dehydrated and starved. It took a week. There was nothing beautiful about it.
Absolutely barbaric . Not everyone dies like this but not everyone slips away gently either. We should all have the option to end that kind of suffering . We don't expect our beloved pets to endure it, why should another human being?

Sardonicat

Jesus, Ursus, that's beyond belief. I'm so sorry your loved one had to endure that.
I've never come across anyone who took longer than my mother to die until now.

I think there is a general ignorance about what death involves. Yes, many people have peacefull, relatively comfortable deaths. I've witnessed deaths that could be described as beautiful. What most people don't realise is that once someone starts actively dying there is no way of predicting how long that process can take. It can range from minutes to hours, to days, to weeks (as I've just discovered to my horror). We should at least have the option to state before hand at what point we don't want to be left to struggle on pointlessly.

And of course there are illnesses and injury that rob you of all autonomy and even your most basic cognition sometimes years before you reach the point of dying naturally. If someone doesn't want to continue to live like that they should be allowed to take their leave in peace and comfort at a time and place of their choosing if that is what they wish to do.

wiggle16

paleoperson wrote: »

Can you mods please stop pretending you know it all or at least stop suggesting that you have any idea what others are talking about? It's bad enough when a common troll does it, but to see moderators take part in this type of trolling is really jarring.
It's you so-called "mods" that make me stop coming to this board. Not so much from being warned or anything, but by your attitude and belligerence and lack of respect for other views.

I'm not a moderator in this forum, so I cannot see what difference it makes. Even if I was, it wouldn't make any difference to what I'm saying either. I'm not the only person who is disagreeing with you on this point or calling you out on the fact that you are pulling an assertion out of thin air. Psychiatry is a well established medical discipline and psychiatrists are themselves medical doctors. You have to have a medical degree in order to practise it and you have to have a medical degree in order to prescribe medication. You would have come across that fact when you googled it.

You said something that was patently false. Others have pointed this out. You can be as insulted and jarred as you choose. It doesn't require anyone to accept or respect your views, just because you are choosing to take a reply as a personal attack rather than argue your point by referring to evidence.

No one is trolling you. No one is modding you. People are pointing out that what you have asserted is not true. I never said you were posting in anything but good faith, and I have not been rude or belligerent to you. You're the one demanding that people change their replies because you don't like them or their tone. I am not going to apologise for pointing out that your assertion is incorrect.

It's quite a common knowledge thing, it is 100% true, many people agree.

No, it's not. Simply saying it is doesn't make it so.

wiggle16

Ivanna Beautiful Ibex wrote: »

I had heart surgery a few years ago. Without it I would be dead now. The last 3years have seen me go places and do things I'd never have done otherwise.

Currently I've a friend receiving palliative care in a hospital. He lives every moment fully and is thankful for that moment. In 30 years I've never once heard him complain.
He saw his wife die in her 30's. She also lived for the moment. Hers was a glorious death according to those with her even though in severe pain.

So it's okay for you to have heart surgery to prolong your life, when according to your logic, your "Giver" of life should be the only one to decide when your time is up, but it's not okay for people to be given the choice to end theirs?

I'm not just nit-picking. Medicine extended your life whereas left up to nature you would have died, but people with a terminal illness must be obligated to let nature take its course, no matter how agonising it might be? I have to say it's quite a callous double standard you have there.

I'm sorry to hear of your friend. My uncle died of cancer two weeks ago after a long battle with it, and kept his sense of humour til the very end. Your friend and his wife may have borne their illnesses well. But just because she died and he is dying in the manner you find acceptable does not invalidate an alternative. If people wish to carry on until their illness kills them, that is their choice. No one should be obligated to do that.

I don't know how you can describe a death as glorious. Many people bear their illness very bravely and with great courage and grace. But it's not like they have much of a choice to do otherwise. Many people cannot do that and it is wrong to deny them an alternative for no good reason.

wiggle16

Sardonicat wrote: »

I think there is a general ignorance about what death involves.

Spot on.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Ivanna Beautiful Ibex wrote: »

I had heart surgery a few years ago. Without it I would be dead now. The last 3years have seen me go places and do things I'd never have done otherwise.

Currently I've a friend receiving palliative care in a hospital. He lives every moment fully and is thankful for that moment. In 30 years I've never once heard him complain.
He saw his wife die in her 30's. She also lived for the moment. Hers was a glorious death according to those with her even though in severe pain.

And I have a relative who died a painful death despite being in palliative care. Painkillers can’t reach all kinds of pain.

I hope your friend in palliative care DOES have a peaceful death. But as of right now, that can’t be guaranteed. As diseases progress, the pain can become unmanageable. It depends. Do we really want to bank on ‘maybe’?

FanadMan

Graces7 wrote: »

With good hospice care, they don't.

They are too doped up to care! Just given enough morphine to make them semi vegetables. My mum died in a hospice. She was so out of it in the last days to even know anyone or do more than open her eyes. If euthanasia was legal, she would have asked for it weeks before when she was fully lucid. All the morphine did was numb the pain of her cancer, but it robbed my mother from us when she needed us most.

It's just old school religious dogma that is keeping us from having it, and the sooner religious influence in personal matters is gone, the better.

FanadMan

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

We're all going to die anyway, so what does terminal illness have to do with it - shouldn't we all be avoiding unnecessary suffering?

So how do you distinguish between necessary and unnecessary suffering?

Is the anguish experienced by a teenager with severe clinical depression really necessary? Why shouldn't they be allowed to request a doctor to kill them.

What about an elderly man with prostrate cancer? It's terminal - it will kill him eventually, but only if nothing else does first. What if he has something else non-terminal that's causing him far more suffering than the cancer is - can he request it?

This is a ridiculous comparison! Teens are always messed up. There is no way they should be allowed to chose euthanasia. Most teens don't even know who they are till they are out of the teens. Hell, you aren't legally allowed to drink here until you are 18, so why should a 14 year old be allowed to end their life because of depression.

An elderly person (with years of life and experience) diagnosed with a terminal disease should at least be given the choice rather than suffering though pointless treatments.

paleoperson

wiggle16 wrote: »

I'm not a moderator in this forum, so I cannot see what difference it makes. Even if I was, it wouldn't make any difference to what I'm saying either. I'm not the only person who is disagreeing with you on this point or calling you out on the fact that you are pulling an assertion out of thin air. Psychiatry is a well established medical discipline and psychiatrists are themselves medical doctors. You have to have a medical degree in order to practise it and you have to have a medical degree in order to prescribe medication. You would have come across that fact when you googled it.

You said something that was patently false. Others have pointed this out. You can be as insulted and jarred as you choose. It doesn't require anyone to accept or respect your views, just because you are choosing to take a reply as a personal attack rather than argue your point by referring to evidence.

No one is trolling you. No one is modding you. People are pointing out that what you have asserted is not true. I never said you were posting in anything but good faith, and I have not been rude or belligerent to you. You're the one demanding that people change their replies because you don't like them or their tone. I am not going to apologise for pointing out that your assertion is incorrect.

No, it's not. Simply saying it is doesn't make it so.

You did, you said I completely fabricated the stereotype when I didn't, psychiatry has long been held with suspicion. Maybe their history of lobotomies, electroshock therapies and unwitting experimentation on patients has something to do with it.

Whether or not it's true is one thing, I didn't make it up.

uptherebels

Ivanna Beautiful Ibex wrote: »

I heard people talk about "caring for people" and giving them a choice in the last 12 months...we then legalised murder of the unborn....but please do keep believing it's to provide "better health care" and a "better quality of life".

Taking medication under medical supervision is better health care. But you know this already.
Again with the emotives
Any chance you can show where abortion in Ireland is considered murder?

Hotblack Desiato

Even the Victorians (who wrote the abortion law applicable here until only five years ago) made a distinction between murder and abortion.

This is just the usual tired, old - and fake - trope but in the absence of supporting logical arguments to be anti-choice it's pretty much all they have.

Paddy Cow

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Anyway....

I know myself that if something ever happened to me, or just through old age, that I was unable to look after myself, or worse be a burden on my loved ones, I would want an exit option.

This also applies to living out my last few years in a home surrounded by strangers or worse, not even recognising anyone I do love. I've a great-aunt going through that now, and I watched my mother waste away in a bed strapped to oxygen machines for the last 2 years of her life and it's no way to live - it's just existing and barely at that.

I'd also apply it to life changing but otherwise survivable events like ending up in a wheelchair or going blind. I know and appreciate that there are many people who live better and more full lives than I do now, but I also know that after over 40 years here, I wouldn't adapt well to the changes.
That's just my own opinion for my own self mind. I fully accept others will disagree and that's fine too.

When my time comes I'd prefer quietly in my sleep or suddenly with as little pain (or trauma to others) as possible. But for situations like the above, ideally just an injection that puts me to sleep and that's that.

If I was in an accident and ended up paralysed from the next down I wouldn't want to go on. I could probably adjust to being blind, as hard as that would be but to be fully lucid, while completely helpless would drive me mad.

Paddy Cow

Ivanna Beautiful Ibex wrote: »

I had heart surgery a few years ago. Without it I would be dead now. The last 3years have seen me go places and do things I'd never have done otherwise.

Currently I've a friend receiving palliative care in a hospital. He lives every moment fully and is thankful for that moment. In 30 years I've never once heard him complain.
He saw his wife die in her 30's. She also lived for the moment. Hers was a glorious death according to those with her even though in severe pain.

That sounds exactly like the Mother Theresa "offering it up" school of thought. It's a sick, twisted, sadistic logic where she denied people medicine and pain relief. She let them suffer until the end and considered that God's will. Of course when she herself got sick she didn't languish in one of her sh!thole "hospitals". Only the best for her :mad:

uck51js9zml2yt

Paddy Cow wrote: »

That sounds exactly like the Mother Theresa "offering it up" school of thought. It's a sick, twisted, sadistic logic where she denied people medicine and pain relief. She let them suffer until the end and considered that God's will. Of course when she herself got sick she didn't languish in one of her sh!thole "hospitals". Only the best for her :mad:

I know very little about her life so can't comment.

What I do know is that for me, being absent from my body is to be present with God...that's what makes it glorious. But most here wouldn't know anything about that.

As for euthanasia/ assisted suicide/ abortion not being murder....aren't euphemisms fantastic.

wiggle16

Ivanna Beautiful Ibex wrote: »

I know very little about her life so can't comment.

What I do know is that for me, being absent from my body is to be present with God.

As for euthanasia/ assisted suicide/ abortion not being murder....are euphemisms fantastic.

The reason we have different words for different things is because there is a distinction to be drawn between one thing or another. They are not interchangeable, they are not euphemisms. You may believe otherwise, but then your belief is irrational.

Aside from your religious beliefs, you have not offered a single reason why someone should not be allowed to choose to die rather than suffer an agonising death.

If your beliefs mean that you could not undergo euthanasia yourself, that's entirely your choice. What exactly is the point in applying your beliefs to others? What difference does it make to you if someone chooses to die? I cannot understand why anyone thinks that their religion allows them to make choices for or deny rights to others.

eigrod

If I could sign up to something now, while aged 51 and compos mentis, stating that I consent to assisted death where 2 properly qualified medical practitioners, and my next of kin (or nearest relative who is sound of mind), agree that it is the best thing for me, I would sign immediately.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Ivanna Beautiful Ibex wrote: »

I know very little about her life so can't comment.

What I do know is that for me, being absent from my body is to be present with God...that's what makes it glorious. But most here wouldn't know anything about that.

As for euthanasia/ assisted suicide/ abortion not being murder....aren't euphemisms fantastic.

Well, assisted-suicide involves self-administration of drugs. The ‘assisting’ part is the prescribing of the medication. A good percentage of people who are prescribed life-ending drugs in Oregon end up never using them for example. The choice of whether to use the drugs is always with the patient. Do you think people who kill themselves using that medication are guilty of murder? And the people who gave them the drugs?

uck51js9zml2yt

wiggle16 wrote: »

The reason we have different words for different things is because there is a distinction to be drawn between one thing or another. They are not interchangeable, they are not euphemisms. You may believe otherwise, but then your belief is irrational.

Aside from your religious beliefs, you have not offered a single reason why someone should not be allowed to choose to die rather than suffer an agonising death.

If your beliefs mean that you could not undergo euthanasia yourself, that's entirely your choice. What exactly is the point in applying your beliefs to others? What difference does it make to you if someone chooses to die? I cannot understand why anyone thinks that their religion allows them to make choices for or deny rights to others.

A person's non religious beliefs dictates how others should think and they're demonised for standing against the tide. Just look at the last 2 referenda and the numerous threads on here as examples.
Just because something is legal, doesn't mean it's right.