It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Do the Terminally Ill Have a Right to Die?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 09:59 AM

My mother died of cancer almost 5 years ago. She had to be rushed to hospital one morning after about 5 years of cancer because we could not wake her up.

She was in and out of consciousness for a week, and then died.

She was in such bad shape that I even asked a nurse if there was any way that we could 'speed it up' and she just looked at me and gave a small nod.

Anyway, I think that it is a good idea, but I also think that life insurance will come into play. They won't want thair valued customers dying by their own terms. To them, that's bad. I can see them (insurance companies) refusing people who choose euthenasia if it ever becomes legal, but I think this will only happen in the early stages.

I believe euthenasia will become legal once a more secure and fool-proof control-grid comes in to play. I'm sure that if you have life insurance, or you simply want to register your wishes to be euthenised when it gets bad in the future, you will fill out a contract that states that you will live a life that is free of such carcinogens such as cigarettes, drugs and alcohol, as these cost the tax-payer many dollars if problems arise because of them.

Your credit card (cash-less society) will not let you buy such items, and on top of this scheduled blood tests will make sure you are keeping clean. Who knows, you may get caught on a bio-metric CCTV-scanner-camera drinking alcohol on the street that your buddy bought you.

It will be moments like that when you will be denied euthenasia and fined, possibly having to go through a suspension period until you are allowed to apply again, with penalties such as higher registration costs and a heightened age upon which you are allowed to use the service.

You were once allowed to use euthenasia at 60, but seeing as you broke the law, you now have to wait until you are 65 or 70 before you are eligible for it.

The future will be a real mess, and should be euthenised.
edit on 14/03/2011 by IIIiIIIIIIiIII because: Had to euthenise a sentence.

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 10:19 AM
I do believe that everyone has the right to die how they see fit, whether due to illness or not, it is their life and their choice, but making euthanasia legal does present its own problems both moral and ethical.

For example, who administers the lethal dose? You, do you give a killing injection to your own mother or father? Do you give an killing injection to your own child? Are you prepared for the issues and consequences afterwards? Do you ask a doctor who has sworn an oath to preserve life to break that oath? Do we create a new profession for ghoul like people to go out and administer the death shot?

And who makes the decision to administer it? At what point does the patient lose the right to choose for themselves? What if one sibling wants to administer the kill shot but another doesn't, who has the final say? Do we leave it to the doctors to decide? What if the system is abused by hospital administrators (the living proof of vampires if I ever saw one) Give the death shot to case that are less profitable to the hospital, while keeping others suffering because they can claim more from insurances companies.

How do you ensure that the patient is not pressured by greedy relatives? Money can be a very evil motivator for some people so how do we protect against this?

As I said I am all for euthanasia, well I am not for it as such, I mean I am all for people having total choice over their lives and deaths where possible, but you cant call for euthanasia to be legalised without covering all the permutations first and offering a framework for it to work in

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 10:28 AM
reply to post by sugarcookie1

Ya know there was this movie, Soylent Green. It was about a future with not enough food for everyone.
A very grim place and time. Everything is crowded and dirty. Few people ever get to see the beauty of nature any more , just the big over crowded city.

Anyway, this old man has had enough of it all and goes to this establishment where he is given a nice hot bath, his first in years, and a nice final meal. He is guided to a nice room where he lays down in a nice clean robe in a nice clean bed by some nice clean women.

They ask him what he would like to listen to and he says something classical. The room is rigged with stereo and begins playing Beethoven while on the wraparound walls there is displayed a 3d vision of a pristine earth with wild animals and waterfalls and stuff. He then falls asleep in his own time and just dosen't wake up.

How sweet is that? Of course the big secret kicker at the end is that his body is rendered down along with all the others and turned into food bars for the starving masses. So much for pathos.

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 10:49 AM
If there were euthanasia booths on every street, in the same way as ATM's,
then I believe demand would be high

Far as I'm concerned, people should be able to end their lives at any time - healthy or not

This world is a zoo, an insane-asylum, as anyone with an ounce of intelligence soon works out

If we don't like a movie - we leave

If we don't like an hotel - we leave

If we don't like a party - we leave

If we don't like a relationship or marriage - we leave

If we don't like a life or a planet or dimension - we should be allowed to leave also without interference from overpaid clergy or corrupt politicians

Who are these people who claim ' every life is sacred ' ? Where did they learn that rubbish ? How dare they chant it to others ?

Every life is sacred, huh ? So what about those 1,000 people who were hacked to death by axes this weekend, for example ? Obviously their killers didn't believe they were sacred. Nor did the 'angels' or 'god'. They died horribly while people in ATS were chatting

No one has the right to take their own life ? Really ? Because it inflicts suffering on their families ? Really ?

But they sign up to kill and be killed in their governments' orchestrated wars, don't they ? And when they ship out to kill people they don't know, overseas, did you know the government ships out their body-bags, along with them ?

And the clergy button their mouths, don't they ? And governments send them off to kill and die ? And that's ok, is it ? Neither their lives nor the lives of those they kill with their superior weapons - are 'sacred ' ? And their families suffer when their rotting corpses are brought back 'home' and they're buried with the nation's flag flying. But that's ok, apparently. Because to sugar-coat the slaughter, the dead are claimed to have 'died for their country '. Sure. Nice touch. Even though those wars were CAUSED by their country ! And those killed by their country were NO threat to the families weeping into their handkerchiefs at the graveside of the 'heroes'

So -- you're allowed to die if you first kill total strangers on the other side of the globe

But the self-righteous bible-thumpers will call you names if you choose to die because the world sucks

Personally, I look forward to the day when suicide-booths exists alongside hotels, brothels, drug-dens, filthy banks and fast-food halls

And it's my opinion that people should automatically be put to death (painlessly) at age 75, with a bonus in the form of a waiving of death-duties for those who elect to die earlier. It would free-up resources (housing, hospitals, etc.) to a huge degree and would spare people the problem of sick and ageing parents. Most of all, it would provide what people need most -- a cut-off date. If people knew they were going to die on their 75th birthday, they'd put more into (and get more out of ) life. And it would remove the worry of being burdens of their families and of being forced to endure years of decay. After all, when a woman's pregnant, she knows when the child will be born. Makes sense that people know when they'll die, also.

But most of all, I hope one day there will be a Death/Exit Day -- same as Earth Day -- when everyone on the planet will, in unison, exit the planet .... kill themselves in protest. When the elite are faced with a worldwide strike action such as International Death Day, it will be an end to their power. It will be an end to the power and control currently wielded by religions. It will be a kick in the teeth to whatever gets its kicks imposing misery and suffering upon billions of humans

After all, it's a given that we're all going to die anyway. It's time WE decided the terms

edit on 3-4-2011 by Dock9 because: a tidy up

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 10:56 AM
EVERYONE without dependents has the right to die. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 11:07 AM

I respect and understand where you are coming from. I do not have a terminal illness
but do live in constant pain. I do not believe I would still be here if I had to deal with
both. You are a stronger person than I am.

I do feel that it is our decision, with some understanding from our families if we choose
to go this route. My family and I have talked about this for some time. They see what
living in pain has done to me and how it affects the way I live my life. While I know they
would not want me to do myself in; I believe they would understand. Besides, living for
years on narcotics has probably destroyed my kidneys and liver like it did my heart.

The best thing is to have a Do Not Resucitate in your records. That is one thing about the V.A.
They make sure your Living Will is updated constantly.

Good Luck to You. Remember that those who tell you that you are wrong do not live your
life. If you want to talk feel free to u2u me.

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 11:17 AM
reply to post by sugarcookie1

sugarcookie1, I think here in America we are woefully behind the times with respecting a persons right to die. I advocate that people after a given age should have the ability to cease their existence in a respectful manner.

Aside from terminal illness are people who suffer terrible mental or physical pain daily. They should have the right to not only terminate themselves, there should be the option to have ones organs and such donated. Maybe another person will have a better life, or a medical student will learn to perfect a procedure, there are many plus sides to being a donor.

I liked the movie Soylent Green. In their futuristic civilization are places for people to go when they choose to die. They are treated with respect and dignity. These people didn't have to cause a traumatic situation with a messy suicide. They no longer had to suffer, to long for what they miss. they did not have to worry about being found dead in their little apartment weeks after the fact. Respect and dignity.

I understand not many people may agree with my opinion. That's okay. Take care sugarcookie1

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 11:17 AM

yes we do!

i talked with the wife tonite about this.

i am out of here as soon as i am terminal.

she wants to prolong it to the end, WRONG, i will pull the plug myself,

at the right time of course.

prolonged illness is a bitck, money and stress and if everything was good before, say goodbye and see ya later!

love ya!

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 11:55 AM
reply to post by Holly N.R.A.


I'm 64. My parents generation are mostly gone. I've lived with parent in-laws who exceeded a practical length of life as I would wish for myself. One finally passed after years of Alzheimer's and for the last two down to basically .infant like life. She did not have the help of hospice to guide her into options available to her while she still had the ability to choose for herself. Her family all helped her stay in denial of her situation.

On the other hand my father in law moved out from living with us for a period, into an assisted living place where he met another woman with whom he companioned until his death two years later. New love at 85. What a hoot.

As you say, we all need to be encouraged to wring as much out of life as we can, while on the same hand finding guidance in ways to understand that it is our choice live while at a certain point, also,our choice to die. From my experience, to many of us deny this second choice to ourselves and our loved ones.

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 12:17 PM

Originally posted by Kangaruex4Ewe

I have the right to scar my body, to tattoo my body beyond recognition, to have EE implants to the point of ridiculousness, to pierce every inch of flesh I can get a needle in, smoke two packs of cigarettes a day, drink a liter of quervo daily, stay up all night, etc.

All of these things are legal and can be done so because it is OUR body.We have control over what we do and do not do to it until the government steps in because they imagine they know best... just like father.

What's more is the fact that I can say when my dog can die by injection because it is too costly to save (whole other issue) him/her. So apparantly we have supreme control over that. Even more so with less government interference. Why is that?

I think anyone over the age of consent has the right to die whether they are terminally ill or not. We either OWN our OWN bodies entirely or we do not OWN them at all. People with a true "death wish" will accomplish it one way or another. Why not make it less painful than it usually is?

The government allows you to believe you are the sole owner of yourself. This is just furher evidence that big government owns us all... lock, stock, and barrel.

Probably not the most popular opinion to be sure. But I do own that much.

edit on 4/2/2011 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)

I agree. No one has to deal/live with your body/brain except yourself. No one else is going to be able to know exactly how you are feeling everyday or what you idea of excruciating pain is. No government, family member, or friend should be able to tell you that what you are feeling is not pain. No one except yourself should be able to decide what happens to you, whether that be going on and suffering for years with the slight possibility of someday no longer feeling pain, or deciding to go ahead and end it.

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 12:46 PM

Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by sugarcookie1 very careful what you all wish for...

The way the flow of money is going these days, i fear the question won't be one of 'Do the Terminally Ill Have a Right to Die?'

And more of 'Do the Terminally Ill Have a Right to life?

Scary thought...but you all know what crap TPB tend to come up with.

spikey its strange you said what you did my husband and i were just talking about that same thing the other day and yes it is a scary thought but you never know what the TPB will come up with next..

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 12:53 PM

Originally posted by maybee
I think this subject is a good reason to have a legal will. I think you can deny extreme measures to stay alive in case you are unable to say at the time. It's good both ways for those who would want it and those who don't.
And to Sugarcookie, prayers and best wishes to you.

I do have a living will and my husband knows what my wishes are and of course he is very tore with my decision but in the end he knows he needs to respect my wishes

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 01:07 PM

Originally posted by jude11
Every single person has the right to decide their own death if it harms no others. It is the only thing we truly own and no one has the right to tell us what we can do with it.


I am going to take my original post a little further and clarify my stance on this.

If I am terminal, I have the right to choose.

If I am depressed, I have the right to choose.

If I am poor, rich or middle class, I have the right to choose.

If I am healthy and just decide I no longer want to be here, I have the right to choose.

If I want to find out what is on the other side of life (Just Because), I have the right to choose.

It doesn't matter the circumstances, I have the right to choose.

The law, politicians and TPTB did not give me my life so, I have the right to choose.

It doesn't matter what the situation is, I have the right to choose.

I can be healthy, rich, loved, successful etc, I have the right to choose.

It is MY life and I have the right to choose what to do with it.

I do however, believe that if my death harms anyone else in doing so, it is wrong to involve someone in the act. By this, I mean physical harm. I do not have the right to harm others by my personal actions...ever.

Rights, compared to ethics, personal morals etc are very different indeed. My death may bring heartache and misery to a few or many and that's the sad part. But to say that because of this, that I don't have the right to choose my time and method of demise is wrong.

I have the right to choose...It is my life and I can not live it or end it for anyone else.

Only myself.

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 01:12 PM

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
I do have a problem with this, it's something that would need to be extremely well regulated. It is possible that ill people may feel they are being a burden to the family and the best solution is to die. But that decision is made out of guilt rather than want.

I do agree with what your saying i believe some people with terminal illness don't want to be a burden to the family medical costs to keep a person alive is unbelieveable ask me i know..But i don't feel like I'm a burden to my family at this point of my illness also when i decide to pass it wouldn't be from guilt i want to say alive just like most people but there comes a point when its going to be just let me go in peace the way i wish..

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 01:17 PM

Originally posted by Phantom traveller
reply to post by sugarcookie1

That's what i said my family a week ago,after i visited a friend with cancer.

if i'm ever diagnosed with a terminal illness,with no chance of recovering,you will pull the plug.

Although my friend is on chemo and she will be fine,the whole thing got me thinking,what's the point of suffering if there is no chance of survival?What's the point of making the family and friends suffer with you if you know what the end is.What's the point of remaining in life two months instead of one.

I'm with you 100% on that matter .

I'm glad to hear your friend is doing good
and yes its something to think about isn't it? thank you for your reply

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 01:23 PM

Originally posted by Quasi
I have like many others experience it in first hand my wife was terminally ill with a lot of pain, there was no chance of recovery and she wanted to die,but the doctors did not allowed because she did not put it on paper, her suffering was not that long it was 2 months(all though nobody has to suffer) it was enough for me to collapse after my wife passed away and still see the picture of her in my mind with tremendous pain.

So for me personally they have to right to die if there is no chance of recovery

Quasi I'm very sorry about your wife's passing i know it had to be very hard for you..These are some of the things i don't want my family to see...

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 01:36 PM

Originally posted by HorizonMan
I fully support the right to choose, frankly, at any time in ones life.

Many societies have considered it the more noble way, and i think that walking with your head up into the next life is an honorable thing to do. This is the difference between man and animal, we can think, see what lies ahead and act on it. Wasting away is not only a horrible way to go, but a drain on the resources of the family. Yes this is a factor, like it or not and is to be taken into consideration.

With the current situation, if you commit suicide, your family will be left with no benefits, and if you don't the hospital will drain them while everyone suffers.

Why, for some superstition about the afterlife. If God made us to be intelligent, then surely we are expected to live and die with that intelligence. Its a very naive viewpoint to think we have to suffer or we are playing God. We play God all the time, when we kill to eat, when we cut down trees to build houses and so on.

The fact is we are afraid to face this subject head on and human up and say its OK, this is the 21st century, we prolong life, cure disease when it makes sense to, and end it when its time to, Making sure, of course, that we have left everything in order for our loved ones.

Having just read how and widow is just been jailed because her husband didn't leave a will, and that is ok. but to gracefully bow out isn't shows how messed up our culture has become.

I think many people take there life's out of guilt because of the drain on the resources of the family and yes it is a huge factor in many cases and its understandable in my eyes..I don't know if there is a afterlife and i guess id like to think there is but that's another crossroad i haven't thought much about and I'm not really sure i care..thanks for your reply

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 01:40 PM
Having seen my dad suffer with Alzheimers for years, his personality change, his memory go, physically decline to the state where he looked like looked like he had come out of Belsen, 6ft tall, 6 stone and my wife working daily with people suffering from the likes of BSE, MND and Parkinson, safely regulated euthanasia has to be the way forward.

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 01:41 PM

Originally posted by roughycannon
If someone is terminal and they are of sane mind to talk for themselves then I think they should have the right to decide but if they are not of sane mind... I'm not too sure, there might be people who are terminal but want to spend every last second with their family and prolong their life as long as possible.

Thanks for your reply!

posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 01:43 PM

Originally posted by aero56
reply to post by sugarcookie1

Yes, we should have the "right to die". It is even scriptural, if you roll that way. Proverbs 31:7. "Strong drink" could by today standards be medication.

I will have to look up Proverbs 31:7 thanks for your reply

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in