(December 15, 2016 at 2:37 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(December 15, 2016 at 2:35 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: I don't.  I just think that hospitals should include considerations/methods respecting a patient's right to die.  There doesn't need to be any dedicated 'death parlors' or anything.

Do you think this should be restricted only to those who are terminally ill? Or at least permanently debilitated enough to where their quality of life is greatly diminished?

Or should it be open to whoever wishes to die?

My personal view?  I'd prefer it be limited to those in the situations you mentioned, or in situations where treatment is unlikely to work, or with a doctor's recommendation.  Having the input of some medical professionals should be a requirement, at least.

Regardless of the disagreements one might have about the extent of availability, I think we all (mostly) can agree that at least a good starting point would be having this option available for the terminally ill. Any further than that, sure we can discuss it, but for christ's sake let's at least get that on the books first.

(December 15, 2016 at 2:40 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote:

(December 15, 2016 at 2:37 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Do you think this should be restricted only to those who are terminally ill? Or at least permanently debilitated enough to where their quality of life is greatly diminished?

Or should it be open to whoever wishes to die?

My personal view?  I'd prefer it be limited to those in the situations you mentioned, or in situations where treatment is unlikely to work, or with a doctor's recommendation.  Having the input of some medical professionals should be a requirement, at least.

Regardless of the disagreements one might have about the extent of availability, I think we all (mostly) can agree that at least a good starting point would be having this option available for the terminally ill.  Any further than that, sure we can discuss it, but for christ's sake let's at least get that on the books first.

Well personally I disagree with any killing, including killing of self and killing of someone who wants to be killed. But this isn't a question of personal values. It's a question of what should be legally permissible.

I think it should be legally permissible under specific circumstances only. Not as a "starting point" but as the only way this should be legally allowed. 

...But now that I see how easily this can quickly turn into a slippery slope, I'm having second thoughts.

Are we not all terminally ill?

It should be a choice for those determined to be of sound mind. 

Might be tough determining what "sound mind" is considered.

Assisted suicide should not be limited to terminally ill individuals.

(December 15, 2016 at 2:33 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Do ya'll actually support the notion of suicide clinics? I mean, I know Pool does... but the rest?

I struggle with this. If you have access to HBO, please watch VICE's "Right to Die" episode. It's Season 4, Episode 3. They follow people with ALS, people with terminal cancer, and also they were allowed to film a woman named Antoinette in Denmark who suffered from severe depression and ended her life on camera. It was profound and moving, and also very conflicting.

Here is a debrief version:




I 100% support the Right to Die for terminally ill patients. ALS would be, for me, the worst and scariest way to die. I would want to live my life to the fullest extent while I could. I don't want to prolong that ride. I want to go out on my terms, and I believe that is my right.

I don't know that people who are bipolar or suffer from depression are able to make that decision in the correct state of mind, and even writing that seems fucked. I believe bodily autonomy is king, so I think I'd have to place my reservations here in the hands of experienced medical ethicists.

(December 15, 2016 at 2:54 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: Are we not all terminally ill?

It should be a choice for those determined to be of sound mind. 

Might be tough determining what "sound mind" is considered.

I feel like it would be a disservice to those dying of brain cancer to say that we are all terminally ill.

---

(December 15, 2016 at 2:56 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote:

(December 15, 2016 at 2:33 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Do ya'll actually support the notion of suicide clinics? I mean, I know Pool does... but the rest?

I struggle with this. If you have access to HBO, please watch VICE's "Right to Die" episode. It's Season 4, Episode 3. They follow people with ALS, people with terminal cancer, and also they were allowed to film a woman named Antoinette in Denmark who suffered from severe depression and ended her life on camera. It was profound and moving, and also very conflicting.

Here is a debrief version:




I 100% support the Right to Die for terminally ill patients. ALS would be, for me, the worst and scariest way to die. I would want to live my life to the fullest extent while I could. I don't want to prolong that ride. I want to go out on my terms, and I believe that is my right.

I don't know that people who are bipolar or suffer from depression are able to make that decision in the correct state of mind, and even writing that seems fucked. I believe bodily autonomy is king, so I think I'd have to place my reservations here in the hands of experienced medical ethicists.

I got 1 free month of HBO so I will be watching this. Thanks for the recommendation.

(December 15, 2016 at 2:37 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(December 15, 2016 at 2:35 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: I don't.  I just think that hospitals should include considerations/methods respecting a patient's right to die.  There doesn't need to be any dedicated 'death parlors' or anything.

Do you think this should be restricted only to those who are terminally ill? Or at least permanently debilitated enough to where their quality of life is greatly diminished?

Or should it be open to whoever wishes to die?

Imo, if someone who is physically able wishes to die, then there are plenty if ways then can die without assistance. However, these are likely to be painful, risk causing permanent and severe physical damage that does not result in death, and risk causing severe mental distress to whoever discovers or otherwise has to process the body.

If assisted suicide can offer a painless and dignified end as an alternative, I don't see why it shouldn't be available to those who aren't terminally ill/incurable as well as those who are, provided appropriate safeguards are in place.

(December 15, 2016 at 2:56 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(December 15, 2016 at 2:54 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: Are we not all terminally ill?

It should be a choice for those determined to be of sound mind. 

Might be tough determining what "sound mind" is considered.

I feel like it would be a disservice to those dying of brain cancer to say that we are all terminally ill.

Any particular reason that you picked brain cancer? Won't any non treatable/non remittable disease do?

They are just closer to the terminal end. Hopefully I'm closer than you. Is that a disservice?

(December 15, 2016 at 3:02 pm)ukatheist Wrote: ...provided appropriate safeguards are in place.

This is the problem, defining the appropriate safeguards.

(December 15, 2016 at 3:09 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote:

(December 15, 2016 at 3:02 pm)ukatheist Wrote: ...provided appropriate safeguards are in place.

This is the problem, defining the appropriate safeguards.

Yeah.  And I'm not necessarily against expanding the availability of this kind of thing to those other than terminally ill patients or patients that are out of treatment options or living with a severely crippling disability.  My position is that for now, let's at least get this up and running for the terminally ill.