‘Aid in Dying’ Movement Takes Hold in Some States

page: 1
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 03:16 PM
link   
GOOD! A few more states are onboard and are trying to pass 'aid in dying' laws. This is WAY too slow in coming, as far as I'm concerned. 'Aid in dying' should be available in every state in the nation. It should be available in every country in the world. Death is a part of life and we should treat people as well as we treat our pets at the end of their lives.

New York Times - ‘Aid in Dying’ Movement Takes Hold in Some States


In January, a district court in New Mexico authorized doctors to provide lethal prescriptions and declared a constitutional right for “a competent, terminally ill patient to choose aid in dying.” Last May, the Vermont Legislature passed a law permitting it, joining Montana, Oregon and Washington. This spring, advocates are strongly promoting “death with dignity” bills in Connecticut and other states ...



About 3,000 patients a year, from every state, contact the advocacy group Compassion & Choices for advice on legal ways to reduce end-of-life suffering and perhaps hasten their deaths.

Giving a fading patient the opportunity for a peaceful and dignified death is not suicide, the group says, which it defines as an act by people with severe depression or other mental problems.


And before someone says it ... no I don't see this as any kind of 'slippery slope'. I see it as compassion and common sense. As with anything there could be abuse, but I think the good that could come from this is worth taking the chance over.

Remember the Charlton Heston movie - Soylent Green?? Remember the 'assisted death' centers that were in the movie? We viewers were supposed to see them as awful or something. I thought they were brilliant.




posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 




In the UK it's called assisted suicide and we've had similar debates and controversies surrounding this over the last few years.
People say that you could bully and bump-off elderly and vulnerable relatives and just say "well they told me they wanted to die" and that there needs to be safeguards.

I think if someone genuinely wants to die and they choose that, sound of mind, I think they should be helped to do so, by medical professionals preferably.
edit on 8/2/14 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


...Remember the Charlton Heston movie - Soylent Green?? Remember the 'assisted death' centers that were in the movie? We viewers were supposed to see them as awful or something. I thought they were brilliant.


Aww. Brilliant to work people into the ground then kill them off when they get too tired to keep going? (read the book long ago, didn't see the movie)

Makes me think of Outland with Sean Connery.

edit on 8/2/14 by soficrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by soficrow
 

No. In the movie there were 'aid in dying' centers that anyone could go to at any time. They went in on their own. Signed up. Answered some questions. Went to a private room and were aided in death. It was calm. It was peaceful. It was pleasant. No pain or panic. It made sense.



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I agree , if an animal is in pain and has no chance of survival we do the humane thing at put it to sleep so why is it we prolong the suffering of our own species , a life not worth living because of terminal illness is no life at all , the choice should belong to the patient.



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


GOOD. As I've watched too many loved ones pass on lately, it occurred to me that only two (outta nearly 20) went the way I'd like to go. Hospitals, by law, keep our bodies technically alive and our minds in a literal "hell."

The good nurses and docs have to speak in a code if you want your loved one to get a large enough dose of morphine that will let them pass on. It took many slow repeats and knowing looks before I got what they meant... and after the initial shock, I was glad that "illegal" option was there... even though the person in question ended up dying all on their own soon after.

Anyway, I don't want to go in a painful, undignified, wrapped in a nightmarish delirium manner... who would? But that's precisely how most people go these days, thanks to being able to keep the body going like that battery bunny of a few years ago.

Maybe they'll offer a service where one can jump from 15,000 ft without a parachute over a vast cemetery when it looks grim. That would be a nice way to go, imo.



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


And before someone says it ... no I don't see this as any kind of 'slippery slope'. I see it as compassion and common sense.


Absolutely. Compassion and common sense

We can keep people alive now in ways that we couldn't before. Brilliant

I've been through this with someone who was essentially kept alive against their will while fully conscious and in a great deal of pain and misery for quite some time. A long time in fact

Nobody could do anything about it - legally. Which meant family and friends, doctors and nurses all had to stand by and not only watch someone suffer - but then actively work to keep them alive so they could continue to suffer

The laws and our beliefs need to keep up with our changing world


edit on 2/8/2014 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


The right to die should be everybody's right.

People claim it's a slippery slope but let's be honest, who should really have access to this service?

Terminally ill patients. That's it. That's the only reason and considering we are using trained medical professionals to administer whatever treatment leads to that, I see no problems.

At least not enough to warrant letting people suffer until their last breath.

~Tenth



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 03:53 PM
link   
When I was a nurse, particularly in the field I practice, military...

I understand the need for assisted suicide in SOME cases. However, this sort of practice should and is suppose to have red tape and a deliberation process for the patient, the family, and the licensed medical officials, who are going to assist in the death.

I believe in total individual freedom. If someone wants to take their life, that is their business. BUT, when it's assisted, and a person is asking someone else to take up the burden of assisting the person through the process... that's something totally different and can manifest later in traumatic ways for all involved, after the deceased loved one is on their otherworldly journey.

I understand, these patients are suffering and in pain, but so is everyone involved in that persons life personally. The family watching their loved one suffer, the medical professionals assigned to take care of the well being of the individual... For me, nursing, was daily heartbreak. I care that much.There is more to consider than just the person who wants to be assisted before natures time, to the hereafter. Ya know?

CdT



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:01 PM
link   
We all suffer from the terminal, 100% fatal illness of life in this world.

No one is immune, there is no cure, no vaccine. The progression of this illness varies as well as the life expectancy for each individual. Death is an absolute certainty in every case.

You all are going to die! The end for you is never as far away as you would like it to be, choosing death to escape life prematurely is wrong, in my opinion. Ultimately there is only one way to find out for sure what that means.



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ausername
 



...choosing death to escape life prematurely is wrong, in my opinion.


Always? Why?



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Spiramirabilis
reply to post by ausername
 



...choosing death to escape life prematurely is wrong, in my opinion.


Always? Why?


You probably won't get a satisfying answer.

This is why most arguments against PAS(physician assisted suicide) don't hold up. They are mostly objective moral arguments, as opposed to ones regarding the law and regarding the rights of people when it comes to their own bodies.

~Tenth
edit on 2/8/2014 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
 


Please see the last sentence in that post.

It isn't like an arbitrary rule or judgement, ultimately it is, like almost everything we do in life. A choice.



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 



You probably won't get a satisfying answer.


:-)

I know - I just have this perverse need to prod those that drop in with these deep, all knowing, cryptic messages to explain themselves

And as we all can see from the post below yours they seldom return with anything of real substance

It's a shame. Seems like if they know something useful - something from which we could all benefit - shouldn't they summon up some courage and spill what they know?

I mean, you know - if they really cared?



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ausername
 



It isn't like an arbitrary rule or judgement, ultimately it is, like almost everything we do in life. A choice.


It should be a matter of choice and free will - but it's not

The reason this choice isn't available to us now is because of rules and judgements - and to my mind many of them are completely arbitrary

Care to explain how they're not?



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
 


PAS cases tug at our heart strings. They make us think of all the 'moral' stances we'd like to think we have or would want to take.

It's a little selfish if you ask me to deny those rights to people who do not know and whose life or death will never effect you in any considerable way. Some may think it's a cop-out, but with my husband being a physician, I've seen a lot of terminally ill patients who suffered.

Actually suffer isn't the proper word. These people would have done ANYTHING to end their torment and so would their families.

We just sit here like arm chair generals passing judgement on things we know very little about. IMO trust the academics and they have been saying for years that we should have passed this legislation.

~Tenth



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I 100% agree with you FF (except for the slippery slope part)


This is a very "touchy" subject among some crowds but in my opinion it should be up to the person who is suffering. I've seen die hard Christians who were totally against this kind of "way out" only to be struck by terminal illnesse and their outlook on the topic completely changed.

Everyone should have this option. No one should have to suffer and be forced to take their own life, a process that can go very wrong much of the time. People in this position should have the option to have it done professionally where they feel no pain.

That being said, it is a very slippery slope as some cultures/societies are taking it a step further and encouraging assisted suicides among the elderly and other people with mental illnesses that could be considered a burden to some people. In my opinion that is pushing it and does not relate to someone who is suffering but still has the mental capacity to choose for themselves.

I remember a family discussion years back after watching a movie, and how we discussed that this is what we would want for each other if the time came.

My opinion is that it is selfish for other people to deny others this option if they are truly suffering.
edit on 2/8/2014 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


IMO trust the academics and they have been saying for years that we should have passed this legislation.


Yes. And we will, eventually

I think it's interesting that sometimes we have to abandon conventional morality in order to be truly moral

There are obviously many people who have never been in this situation themselves. It doesn't take much of an imagination to empathize, but still - I think sometimes life is something they value over all else. I do understand that their belief system is a big part of that

But, it only takes once for you to have a better understanding of the true value of life - and realize that compassion is not a crime



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:47 PM
link   

CirqueDeTruth
There is more to consider than just the person who wants to be assisted before natures time, to the hereafter. Ya know?


I don't think so. If a person wants to go ... they should be allowed to go. They are going anyways and it's a HUMANE thing to do to help them along. What family wants ... what medical people have to deal with later ... as far as I'm concerned, it's irrelevant. If a medical person can't deal with it, then they shouldn't be in that end of the field that will help people's terminal illness pain end. If family can't deal with it, then they are selfish. IMHO



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
 


If someone chooses suicide for whatever reasons they have there is little in the way to prevent them from ending their own life. I guess what we are discussing here is a way to make it easier for them?

Death isn't a right, it is inevitable. The right to death?

If it ends suffering and it is humane, done in a way that somehow absolves the suicidal person of guilt in their final moments of clarity I guess that makes it all easy and better.

Assisted suicide is still suicide.

Right or wrong is a matter of perspective.



new topics
top topics
 
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join