I do believe in reincarnation. I believe that assisted suicide would rarely have any consequences on one’s rebirth, especially in the instance of severe illness or fatal disease. For some, the basis of reincarnation is that we have come here to live as mortals in order to learn something or improve the condition of the soul. One cannot learn or work on his/her soul while in a vegetative state, or while in the advanced stages of Alzheimer’s, etc, so there is no purpose for continuing the life.

I agree with this statement 110%, but it also got me wondering.

in order to learn something or improve the condition of the soul.

Some people believe (myself included) that we are here to learn and improve ourselves.
What if the caretaker was here to "learn" about taking care of a person with alzheimers, and the person with alzheimers decides to put a bullet through his own head. Does this mess with the big scheme of things? (rhetorical question)
I still believe as I stated, but the questions seem to outnumber the facts.

This doesn't need an answer, just something to think about.

They are healers, or at least are supposed to be. How is assisting in the death of their patients healing them? I am not saying they should not make them as comfortable as possible in the case of a terminal illness. Of course they should. Where does it end. My feeling is that in aiding a suicide they are in violation of the oaths they take as healers. My opinion, that's all. I make no claims to omnicience and ultimate wisdom...I am not God, but neither are doctors, this is a very slippery slope and must be tread carefully lest we go too far.

Originally posted by seagull
My feeling is that in aiding a suicide they are in violation of the oaths they take as healers. My opinion, that's all.

Sure. But once it's been determined that there is no way to heal, no way to make the situation better, what then? That happens, you know. Sometimes healing is no longer possible.

Should the doctor just pack up his bags at that point and tell the patient and their family that they're on their own? "I've done my job. Good luck with the years of suffering ahead!"

Actually, in the United States, there's a growing hospice movement that is helping people in this situation. Without involving the doctor (which is advantageous to doctors wishing to avoid malpractice lawsuits), the hospice moves in, changes medications from treatment to pain-killing. They try to keep the patient as lucid and pain-free as possible, while allowing nature to take its course.

Some people see no difference between stopping treatment and actively doing something to end the patient's life, like giving them a toxic injection. But some do. Some people also see this as somehow "subverting God's will," but you could say that whether it's about inserting the feeding tube, or removing it.

I suppose it all depends on whether you see life/death as a social concern or a personal concern.

Enkidu. There are so many ways to aliviate suffering, suicide indeed being one of them. But suicide is very, very final, and who knows what treatment may be just around the bend, so to speak, that will cure or at least arrest, the condition. Hopeless today is not neccessarily hopeless tommorrow. It comes down to this, I guess, where there is life there is hope. Suffering is horrible, and suicide is indeed one way to aliviate it. If someone chooses to end their pain in this fashion that is I feel certainly their perogitive, I don't think I've ever said otherwise, if I did or implied such, that certainly was not my intent. We should have the right to end as we see fit, at a time and a place of our choosing. I can't say it plainer than that...
but again, and I know I'm getting repetitive...suicide is so very final, you can back off of any other sort of treatment, but not suicide, assisted or otherwise.

i will rep. Assisted suicide til the day i die!, 503-ORE-for life!!!!!!!!!!! we are untouchable!!!! no one can # wit it!

They are healers, or at least are supposed to be.

Not trying to dis you at all, but maybe the best way to "heal" a neverending suffering state is to end it?

I myself would consider it a doctors job to do it right. As long as the doctor saw that it was within his own morals to do so. Wouldn't want to force that job on anyone.

And we're not saying that everyone has to end their lives when they get sick, it would just be nice to have the choice. Nobody HAS to do it. What's the problem about having it available to those who would choose it? Why does the government step in and say no, you can't do that, when it's such a personal, private thing?

I am not saying no to the option of suicide to end the unendurable agony of unrelenting pain. If all other options have been explored and utilized than it does become an option. This is really all I am saying, other than I think doctors and hospitals should not be involved in it. Someone, I don't remember who, mentioned hospice care, perhaps when someone has reached the end of their ability to cope with the disease, or condition they have battled a hospice situation as a way to ease them out of this life would be an alternative acceptable to those of us who have issues only with who is involved with the assistance.

Does that make sense? A trained hospice worker, who can help not only the patient, but his or her family cope with what is about to happen? It would certainly allieviate to a large extent my reservations with the ethical concerns that I stated earlier in the thread.

But doctors and hospitals are the ones who have control of the drugs and facilities that can provide this service. Does a hospice have access to what they would need to do this? If so, how did they come by it? From a doctor...

Grady. Thanks...that was exactly what I was trying to say earlier. Why not, if the patient feels it is time to go to whatever awaits us beyond, allow the hospice to provide it? The surroundings would be more congenial, if one can use that word to describe suicide, for both the patient and the patient's family. A nurse practitioner, or other suitably trained individual, can administer the dosage after whatever ceremony of leavetaking is completed.

I am sure there are pitfalls to this idea that would surface, but that seems a fairly equitable solution to the ethics issue.