euthanasia for psychological distress

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 06:24 AM
link   
It happened monday in Belgium. Someone, who was born Nancy, wanted to become Nathan, and made the choice to become a man through surgical means. But according to him/her, the result was not satisfying at all.





I had prepared dragees for my new birth, but the first time I saw myself in the mirror, I felt disgusted by my new body. I still had breast and my penis was a fail. I had some happy moments, but finally it became unbearable. I have lived 44 years and it's 44 years too many.


In Belgium, the law allows for the possibility to practice euthanasia in case of psychological distress. But personally I find it hard for someone to actually estimate 'psychological distress', even psychiatrists. I don't think we have the knowledge to really estimate that.

This is what her/his mother said :

When I saw Nancy for the first time, it broke my dream. She was so ugly. I gave birth to a monster, a ghost. I feel no pain and no remorse. For me, this chapter is over, I don't care about her death. I feel no pain, no doubt, no remorse. She was never part of our family, thus in cannot be broken.


The question for me is, again : how can we estimate 'psychological distress' ? How can we know that it is something permanent or temporary, how can we know how deep it is ? How can we know that it will not disappear after a new hobby/interest is found, through religion for example, or philosophy, or anything else? Nonetheless the doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists, gave the green light for euthanasia. Or should we give the right to suicide to anyone ? Is it better to assist a suicide than to leave the person commit suicide on her own ? We know that there are a lot of suicides, and Belgium is ranked 5th in Europe.

In Belgium, some want to extend that law to minors under 18 with "discerning capabilities", and also to alzheimer patients.


source in French



+6 more 
posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 06:28 AM
link   
Any adult in the world should be allowed to engage in physician assisted suicide for any reason they wish. It's their life. They are the ones who know best if they can live it or not. We have no business judging someone else's level of 'psychological or physical distress'. What is a huge burden for some, isn't for others. We can't judge.

I say ... Physician assisted suicide for any adult for any reason they deem it necessary.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 06:50 AM
link   
The problem with this is the very symptom of what makes depression depression is it makes people feel as if everything is doomed and hopeless and nothing about how they feel will ever change.

Which is of course why the depressed mind starts to consider such extreme positions as self-termination as the only viable solution to the problem of feeling so awful forever.

This is the illness talking though. Tackle the depression, and the concept of self-termination as the only solution recedes.

So no, I would like to see screening that specifically prevents people with depression from being allowed to kill themselves with the assistance of a physician. Instead I'd like to see them get counselling, therapy, and medication, so that they can get back to a place where life is worth living again.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 07:47 AM
link   
Ok, so reading the mothers reaction to his death, I would think it is pretty darn obvious that there is some type of mental disorder that runs it that family.

I am a firm believer in the right to choose, for the individual themselves and only themselves. Be it mental or physical ailment, if you are a grown adult, it should be your choice.
I've felt this way ever since Dr. K made it such a public issue.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 



Physician assisted suicide for any adult for any reason they deem it necessary.


Two little words....'hypocratic' and 'oath'.

But accessibility to scientifically-attested, humane methods of suicide ought to be made easier for those of us too impatient to wait for the train to pull in at the station.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 08:31 AM
link   

CJCrawley
Two little words....'hypocratic' and 'oath'.

Helping someone end their suffering via assisted suicide is not harming them.
It's helping the suffering to end in a human way that is wanted by the patient.
On the other hand .. the doctors that perform abortions ARE harming unborn humans.
And they do so without any compunction.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by gosseyn
 





Or should we give the right to suicide to anyone ?


We don't give rights, we take rights away or we protect them.

The question isn't "Do we give the right to suicide?", but do we allow a person to make that choice with dignity. Or, do they have to die alone, in a bloody bathtub or hanging in a closet.

Now, I don''t know how doctors regulate assisted suicide, but I assume one doesn't just walk into a DR's office or a clinic, and say "assisted suicide please". I'm sure that there is some sort of criteria, even a wait period. But dignity is imperative, in my opinion.





edit on 2-10-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by CJCrawley
 


Not trying to be rude, but it's Hippocratic oath. DENY IGNORANCE. My apologies.
edit on 2-10-2013 by devildogUSMC because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 10:13 AM
link   

devildogUSMC
reply to post by CJCrawley
 


Not trying to be rude, but it's Hippocratic oath. DENY IGNORANCE. My apologies.
edit on 2-10-2013 by devildogUSMC because: (no reason given)


Of course it is, well done devildog for spotting the deliberate mistake!

Just testing you all to see if you're on your mettle.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Anyone should be able to take their life at any time. I view it as the divine right of that person to decide when to exit. No one should interfere with that choice and no one has the right to interfere because of their own warped beliefs.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Let's be clear about what you're proposing.

Surely it's only people incapable of seeing themselves off who qualify for assisted suicide?

If you can physically do it yourself you should do so, no?



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Restricted
Anyone should be able to take their life at any time. I view it as the divine right of that person to decide when to exit. No one should interfere with that choice and no one has the right to interfere because of their own warped beliefs.


So, you see no reason to have any restrictions on this? Obviously, if you really want to commit suicide then no one can stop you, but if you want help doing it then there should be certain factors involved in the "help". What about an 18 yr old who just had their heart broken and wants to have help? What about a Mother who just lost her child? What about a person who thinks their life is no longer worth living only to find out three years later they have a new way to exist and find joy in life? How many stories of overcoming bad situations are there and yet many of those people wanted to die. They would have never found joy and maybe an amazing new talent if they had offed themselves.

This is not a simple situation. Then there is the government deciding ... you see it's a slippery slope. We don't start off with government death chambers, but how do you think we end up there? Too many people want a simple solution and death is never simple.

Suicide is a very permanent solution to a temporary problem.

(for most)
edit on 2-10-2013 by UnifiedSerenity because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 11:03 AM
link   

CJCrawley
Surely it's only people incapable of seeing themselves off who qualify for assisted suicide?
If you can physically do it yourself you should do so, no?


No. Anyone who wishes to leave life should be able to do so in a dignified and pain free manner. Instead of people hanging themselves or blowing their heads off at home for their families to find, they should have the option of being 'assisted' with death. That's what assisted suicide means .... someone assists.

Frankly, I think that the movie Soylent Green had the right idea.
Their futuristic assisted suicide center should be in operation in real life ... IMHO.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 11:05 AM
link   

UnifiedSerenity
So, you see no reason to have any restrictions on this?

None. Any adult for any reason. Its a persons right.

Suicide is a very permanent solution to a temporary problem.

Lots of people say that, but I find that catch phrase to be mostly untrue and really trite.
Sorry.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 


Ever been mentally or terminally ill? If not, then you speak from a position of ignorance.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Adult? So 18 years old?

Dont be mistaken, I agree with you. If anyone wants to die, fine with me, it is their life and their choice.
But when are you an "adult". Is it by age, or by emotional growth?

A 15 year old kid, can sometimes be much more mature than a 40 year old grown man.

If it should be by age. Than at least here in Denmark your an adult when you reach 18. In my opinion? Most 18 year olds are hardly capable or mature enough to make such a choice.

So.. 25? Im almost 25, not sure I am yet mature enough to make such a choice?

Emotional growth/maturity? Well as I said, a 15 year old kid can sometimes seem very mature. If a 15 year old has valid arguements and seems sensible enough, should we then say: "Sure mate, we will help you die." ?

I am asking these questions, because that is the moral dilemma that I am personally stuck on when it comes to this topic.

--

I am currently thinking that assisted suicide, euthanasia, whatever you call it, should be freely available. But there needs to be some sort of judgment call on each and every single case. Most importantly the reason for wanting to die should be a big part of wether you get help or not. But who could make such calls? Should there be a standard checklist to go through?

--

Its such a huge dilemma, ethicly.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Restricted
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 


Ever been mentally or terminally ill? If not, then you speak from a position of ignorance.


You have no right to know my personal details. You are using a typical tactic to shut up anyone you disagree with, and quite frankly it's disturbing. So, are you saying that unless someone has personally experienced every event possible they have no right to voice their opinion? So, you are against the right to free speech?

So typical and so hypocritical. I bet you talk about crap all the time you don't personally have an experience with, and yet you lecture me? Hypocrite



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 11:57 AM
link   

gosseyn

The question for me is, again : how can we estimate 'psychological distress' ?


Whose "we"? And who is this "we" to have power over the life or death of an individual?

No one has rights over another persons life. That is delusion and arrogance that makes one think that they should have the power to determine what another grown adult does with their life, especially when its to end it.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 


Wrong. The person made a good point. Unless you have suffered what the person has suffered, you have no idea what they are going through. You have no idea how much a person can handle and can't. What is easy for you is not so easy for others. And mental illness may not look like a big deal on the outside, but carrying it on the inside can be hell on earth.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by needlenight
 


My thread on this ATS Thread - Legalize Assisted Suicide
The matter of those under 18 is a hard one.





top topics
 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join