What is the argument in favour of euthanasia for people who are not about to die?

Self suicide, or assisted suicide?

 

Why shouldn't it???

I believe in the concept of my body, my choice... If you wanna drink, smoke, do drugs (but I repeat myself), jump out of airplanes, drive racecars, or, yes, even end your own life, that is your absolute birthright to do so. Yes, within guidelines, yes, with certain exceptions, for adults only, but as a relatively newly disabled person, while I have adapted pretty will to my situation, some might say amazingly well, other's are in so, so much worse condition than even I am. I can't walk, or dress myself, or do a lot of things that not so long ago I took for granted. But something like what happened to me gives you a different perspective, I think, and even though my opinion on this issue hasn't changed as a result, it has become more cemented.

You are a free person, with free will, and no person on this planet possesses the authority to tell you that you can't off yourself. PERIOD!!!

 

medically assisted suicide, means giving the person doing it the means via a shot or something, nice peaceful, not long and painful death

 

I cannot find your first source. Where did you get it , the dark web?
But this shows you know little about diabetes which can and does affect every organ in the body. One of the “ delights” is a condition called diabetic neuropathy which can be incredibly painful

 

For.
Completely and absolutely

Spent too many years in the medical field and if anyone ever thinks there is nothing worse than death I suggest you volunteer at a hospital for a while

 

You seem to think that this thread is about suicide.

 

Then you can do it alone without help, right?

 

You clicked on the link? Link again below.

https://www.thefp.com/p/scheduled-t...CRb4iegvkM1IHCA8rVxaRf6PIVUdQ_TYFB41Mkwr4OaE4

 

With what limits?

 

Do you make a distinction between a coma patient's life support being switched off, and injecting someone with something to kill them?

 

No mate sorry the source THEFP does not Google but I eventually found it as “The Free Press”. I was take. Aback by the dismissal of diabetes as not a life limiting disorder

Okay - let’s go back to that original story. “Diabetic” does not sound bad especially since he is 23 but that also means he is in all probability a type one diabetic aka “childhood” diabetic and he may have been diabetic for 15- 20 years. My youngest patient in Coronary Care was a diabetic who, at age 24 he just had her fifth heart attack. She did not live to see 30 because both carotid arteries (the ones that take blood to the brain) had blockages causing strokes. It is individual as to what people will live with or want to live with. In my career I have seen not one but three “locked in syndromes”. That is where the damage to the spine (OK Pons) is so bad that the only voluntary movement left is vertical movement of the eyes. If that ever happens to me please trip on the power chord to the ventilator on your way out the door

 

Mate there is simply no way you can understand the subtleties of these situations without actually being involved.

 

And you DO I guess, yet you aren't able to say if there is a distinction between a coma patient's life support being switched off, and injecting someone with something to kill them.

 

Why are you Googling "THEFP?" Why not just click the link?

Ok, but you haven't said if you think this should qualify someone for death by doctor.

 

I don’t click random links until I have Sussed out what they are like - too many conspiracy theorists on this forum who play in some weird places on the internet

And yes I have said. You just have not been taking notice. Now because you are posting with short short response times I will purposely not reply immediately as I suspect you are focussing too much on this

 

No, this is the first time that you have discussed the 23 year old case with me.

You think that I am "focussing [sic] too much on this", but I have no idea what you're even referring to. Whatever "THIS" is.

 

you mean starving someone to death vs giving them a shot... they both have the same outcome in most cases

 

How is life support just about feeding someone?

 

Feeding tubes is one option, could also be air you are denying them - often same outcome

 

And shooting someone in the head... same outcome?

 

We're all going to die eventually. Why would it be understandable for someone to be allowed to die to avoid a couple of weeks of irresolvable intense suffering but not to avoid a couple of years or a couple of decades of irresolvable intense suffering? Modern medical technology is such that we could keep pretty much anyone "alive" almost indefinitely but we don't, because we recognise that being "alive" isn't the be-all and end-all.

It is undeniably a difficult area, clinically, morally and emotionally and so is always going to raise impossible questions and choices. It is all too easy to let our emotions and our morality dominate our thoughts when considering it though, especially in the context of specific cases when I'd suggest we should really be focusing on the emotions and morality of the people actually involved, primarily the patient themselves. Clearly where it is literally a matter of live and death, it is vital we make sure all of the relevant information is available and all of the practical options have been considered (though that applies to plenty of other situations too) but I still think it boils down to patient choice.

Some people have moral objections to all sorts of medical procedures or decisions (blood transfusion, organ transplants, cosmetic surgery, tattoos, vaccination, bio-technology implants, doctors overruling parents etc.) but we don't use their moral opinions to determine whether other people can choose those options.

 

yep, but messier, thus the shot, but some do support death by firing squad for the DP

 

With a terminal illness?

That does not sound true at all.

ANYTHING "boils down to patient choice?"

Peoples' "moral opinions" influence how they vote, no?

 

The "same outcome" being what?

 

Yes I do - I spent more years than you have probably been on the planet working in the sharp end of health care and I am telling you that this is extremely complex.

I presume though, you are talking about “brain death” which in exact medical terminology is equivalent in many jurisdictions to brain stem death. Not only is the basics in medicine somewhat complicated but the legal structure governing this varies from country to country and even, in Australia, state to state. Adding to this is legislation in relation to organ donation. In some areas they will do organ donation from patients who have intact cerebral functioning but who experience circulatory death https://www.donatelife.gov.au/for-h...al-guideline-donation-after-circulatory-death

And this is why I am telling you there are no simple answers and I, for one, will not be harangued into providing one. IF you wish to know more I will attempt to educate you but I am unimpressed with accusations.