So my brother recently wrote an essay on euthanasia for one of his university courses and it got me thinking; is it moral and "right" to commit euthanasia on someone? Is it murderous or is it merciful?
Personally, I don't think it's right to take one's life in any circumstances; especially not suicide or assisted suicide. I know that this is what I believe, but I admit that if I was in such a position of pain that death was the only way out, I might want someone to kill me; and if someone I loved was in such a position of pain I know I wouldn't want to see them in more pain.
I say suicide and assisted suicide is wrong, and so I guess I'm against euthanasia.
What do you think?
If you are against euthanasia like you said, but yet you admit that you would want it to be done to you if the circumstances are right, wouldn't that make you a bit of a hypocrite?
No; I'm saying that I am against it, but I really don't know what I would do if I ever found myself in a situation were doing it was the best solution. I'm not saying "I'm against it but I'll do it myself", I'm saying "I'm against it but I don't know what I would do if ever faced with that decision".
I am pro-euthanasia. I don't think people should force you to live a month of suffering longer just to die anyways.
I'd rather choose painless death than painfull death.
I'm pro euthenasia. I for one would definitely prefer not to be reliant on anyone in that capacity. I'm a DNR etc. Sure people can say at least u are alive, but at what cost? Because i'm breathing does not mean i am 'alive'. I'm lying in a bed, in pain, incurring ridiculous expenses, taking the time of my loved ones, essentially a burden. I would much prefer the option...
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| So my brother recently wrote an essay on euthanasia for one of his university courses and it got me thinking; is it moral and "right" to commit euthanasia on someone? Is it murderous or is it merciful? |
Murderous? Hardly. That's not even rational. If someone asks to be killed, how is it murderous to say "ok" and help out?
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
Personally, I don't think it's right to take one's life in any circumstances; especially not suicide or assisted suicide. I know that this is what I believe, but I admit that if I was in such a position of pain that death was the only way out, I might want someone to kill me; and if someone I loved was in such a position of pain I know I wouldn't want to see them in more pain.
I say suicide and assisted suicide is wrong, and so I guess I'm against euthanasia.
What do you think? |
Who owns your life? And who do you think owns mine?I guess that the word murderous depends on the legality of the action, rather than the morality.
In that case, euthanasia is legal in several countries* (and in Oregon I believe) so is clearly not murder there. In the UK a bill to legalise 'assisted dying' was blocked by the Lords in 2006. It may be reintroduced in the near(ish) future.
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia Sorry that I wasn't clear, I actually meant that is it murderous or merciful in a case where the person does not ask you to kill them, but you do it anyway to prevent them from feeling any more pain. They didn't ask for it, but you are ending their pain.
If someone does ask to be killed to end their pain, then I would go with it being ok to help them out. But if they don't ask for it, then I'm against it.
I think that where euthanasia is legal it is an absolute requirement that the person gives prior consent. I don't know of any country that would 'allow' unsolicited mercy-killing.
There is, however, a grey area. If someone is on full life-support, for example, then relatives are frequently consulted about the decision to remove such life-support in cases where 'brain-stem' death has occurred. I would argue that in such cases the person is already dead (note - I say 'person') and there is therefore no question of 'killing'. In cases where the person is still alive (ie the brain-stem is not dead) then it is, of course, much more controversial.
There is also the situation where a patient is given pain relief in the knowledge that such pain relief will also speed their death. This is called the 'double effect' principle and is a grey area in UK law - many doctors do it but technically it could be considered illegal.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
Sorry that I wasn't clear, I actually meant that is it murderous or merciful in a case where the person does not ask you to kill them, but you do it anyway to prevent them from feeling any more pain. They didn't ask for it, but you are ending their pain.
If someone does ask to be killed to end their pain, then I would go with it being ok to help them out. But if they don't ask for it, then I'm against it. |
In that case, I'm against it. Only the person him/herself should have the right to decide about his/her life.
But if the person asks for it, I am pro. I would probably not be able to do such a thing myself though. To take someone else's life, even if the person asks for it, would be too much to handle to me.Fortunately in circumstances where the person is unable to communicate their wishes it is also likely that they will not be in extreme (physical) pain. There are some levels of pain which are unbearable - I know this from experience. If I were in such pain with no hope of getting better then I would certainly want 'the needle'. My own take is that it has to be a personal decision - as Indi points out, who else should be regarded as 'owning' my life?
As regards euthanasing a person (not a brain dead patient) without their consent - no, I cannot see any circumstance in which that would be morally justified, because it would imply that someone other than the individual has 'ownership' of that life (I reject that notion, since I believe that is one of the 'rights' of personhood).
im all for euthanasia. no point being so close to death yet not dead. you either be alive or dead. not on a bed being unable to do anything other than to groan from all the pain your feeling being a financial burden to the rest of people who care and love you.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
Sorry that I wasn't clear, I actually meant that is it murderous or merciful in a case where the person does not ask you to kill them, but you do it anyway to prevent them from feeling any more pain. They didn't ask for it, but you are ending their pain.
If someone does ask to be killed to end their pain, then I would go with it being ok to help them out. But if they don't ask for it, then I'm against it. |
Agreed. It will be wrong.
I feel for that person however, as strong emotions particularly when we are very involved with the person who is suffering can make us do things we could never conceive of doing.I think the question that needs to be answered is whom do you believe is the arbiter of your fate, you or the state? Who should have dominion over your body? I think the individual should.
That being said, we routinely put dogs to sleep in order to alleviate their suffering yet keep terminal patients alive at all costs, prolonging their suffering. Seems we treat our animals with more respect than we treat ourselves.
First off, if a person is brain dead and indicators show that they will remain so, in my opinion they are not alive - even if they have a heart beat.
If a person in a terminal state of being and nothing to look forward to other than misery, pain, and death, then they should be given the power to end their own existence
Euthanasia is one of the greatest topics of debate, in my opinion. There are so many reasons to be against or for ‘mercy killing’.
But, in my own opinion, I think it is something that should be supported. I assume everyone has been raised to believe that their life is their own, that they can become whatever they want, etc. If this is the case, who is to tell us when or when not our life is to continue? I believe that if a beloved member of my life came to me in their time of need, their time of pain, and would not wish to spend their last days feebly withering away, struck with sickness until either their memories were lost, or they became a prison of their own body, I would help to release them of the torment. It is a tough choice; I’m not saying it’s not. But, I would hope that someone will love me enough to show me mercy should I ever find myself in such a situation.
Though, this leads me to question suicide... I know where I live suicide is illegal. A failed attempt puts one in a mental insinuation, of course, and if not that... then jail. How do you all feel about someone willing, and capable, of taking their own life?
I think it is more immoral to force someone to live against their will than to allow them to die with dignity.
Just my 2 cents, it's pretty straightforward, and I don't understand why people get so flustered about it. If you are in the position of terminal illness and don't want to die, do not be euthanised. If you want to, then you should have a right to.
Pretty simple to me.
| Soulfire wrote: |
I think it is more immoral to force someone to live against their will than to allow them to die with dignity.
Just my 2 cents, it's pretty straightforward, and I don't understand why people get so flustered about it. If you are in the position of terminal illness and don't want to die, do not be euthanised. If you want to, then you should have a right to.
Pretty simple to me. |
I couldn't agree more.OK, some interesting points. Here's another to consider.
Given that the consensus here seems to be that people should have the right to end their own lives (and I hope I am not misconstruing the postings by making this assumption), then what about the situation where the person cannot end their life themselves without help?* Should a doctor, for example, be compelled to euthanase someone who requests that 'service'? If you have a right to be euthanased then does the state have a duty to provide that euthanasia?
* I think the issue of suicide is fairly straightforward - most western countries have moved towards a position where suicide is no longer illegal. The issue of euthanasia is still, however, a deeply controversial one.
| catscratches wrote: |
I am pro-euthanasia. I don't think people should force you to live a month of suffering longer just to die anyways.
I'd rather choose painless death than painfull death. |
If I was in pain due to some kind of cancer, and I only had a month or so to live, I'd just get some serious pain medication. Even though I face things in my life that really put me down, I find that I enjoy it. For a month, just sitting in a comfortable chair outside and enjoying the scenery in the wind is a great last month for me.
However, those who feel they'd rather have it over with, than spend one last month, do have a right to be euthanized.
| myleshi wrote: |
I think the question that needs to be answered is whom do you believe is the arbiter of your fate, you or the state? Who should have dominion over your body? I think the individual should.
That being said, we routinely put dogs to sleep in order to alleviate their suffering yet keep terminal patients alive at all costs, prolonging their suffering. Seems we treat our animals with more respect than we treat ourselves. |
I agree with you on this. | JessieF wrote: |
| However, those who feel they'd rather have it over with, than spend one last month, do have a right to be euthanized. |
But this would imply then that someone has the duty to do the euthanasing (if requested) - is that your position? | Bikerman wrote: |
| JessieF wrote: | | However, those who feel they'd rather have it over with, than spend one last month, do have a right to be euthanized. |
But this would imply then that someone has the duty to do the euthanasing (if requested) - is that your position? |
Hmm, I see how you thought of this. I'm not quite sure, but if I go with how I feel, then yes. I am not sure how I think of it logically.If the person is fully right in their mind, they're aware of their situation/surroundings, they have the ability to make a decision on their own, etc., I see no problem with it.
If the person is in a state where the above details don't apply, I'm not sure. Situation becomes a bit more difficult in my opinion. We've stated earlier that the only person that owns your life is you. So I don't know if I can say it would OK for the parents/husband/wife to then have the decision for the person in bad health (or whatever other reason).
I think that a doctor should be able to refuse to do it. I don't think it's ok to force someone to kill another person (even if that person is in great pain and wants his/her life ended).
Obviously safeguards would be needed.... but I'd like to be able to request that I am "put out of my misery" - if that happens....
Look at it this way.... we are allowed to put animals to sleep when they are suffering... yet the law forces fellow humans to suffer. Surely that isn't logical...
Malcolm
I think that it should be at the discretion of a neutral third-party. A doctor should not be forced to make the decision to euthanize a patient as it goes against the Hippocratic Oath, which says to 'cause no harm.' However, it should also not be up to the patient, as he/she will be willing to say or do anything to end their pain or agony...to be 'put out of their misery'.
