(October 5, 2009 at 12:02 am)Overmars Wrote: People who complain about the terminology used are being superficial towards this issue. I seriously don't give a fuck about the propaganda spread by those self-righteous pricks. This is a matter of life and death yet some bitch about it being called "assisted suicide". Honestly, do you think that somebody who suffers from a terminal illness, who is permanently on drugs and restricted to a hospital bed gives a damn if it's called "assisted suicide' or "the right of the terminally ill to hasten their death"? I don't think so.

You may not give a damn... until one day you realize that your apathy is the very reason that religious nuts have been so successful in getting the restrictive laws they want, as part of their anti-choice agenda.

No, the person on their death bed doesn't care about terminology. But they sure as hell care about the fact that they don't have the right to die a peaceful death with dignity. And in most states, they presently don't have that right.

So, the best thing that I can think of to educate you, and other apathetics, is for one of your loved ones to be on their death bed and you helpless to assist them without facing prison for doing it.

No, I've been there and done that. And now I will pay attention to the terminology because I don't want to give religious nuts control of the debate.

Ah, I see how it could be considered merciful. Thank you for clarifying that confusing issue Though would it not be more merciful by far to fix the problem? I say that instead of relying on euthanasia... our focus should be on ensuring that nobody has to suffer a situation where euthanasia is the best option. Further our medical progress: accept stem-cell research.

I had not thought of a disabled body when I wondered why a person couldn't kill themself... and hopefully there will come a time when nobody would think about such a situation.

Well imagine if a person got caught in a building fire and suffered 3rd degree burns on his entire body. Imagine being in so much pain... >.<

After 3rd degree burns they have to peel off the burnt skin, and then they soak you in a tank of anti-burn stuff every day; they give you morphine and pain meds but it still hurts like hell. As far as getting skin back on you, they make a film out of soybeans, and they put it on your body; It acts as a scaffold for new skin to grow on. It takes years to recover from, and you are in constant excruciating pain, but I wouldnt want to be euthanized just because of pain like that, as you do eventually recover.

I think euthenasia for terminal illness or brain damage is appropriate if the person in question decides it is what they want, I personally would not want that, as there is always a chance of recovering through a new medical development, but I can understand a persons decision, and I think it is inapropriate for a government to deny a person that choice.

It's the sort of thing TBF you'd need to have written somewhere as your stated wishes should such a circumstance arise.

I would've thought that much tissue damage would kill you. What a nightmare that sounds

(October 6, 2009 at 5:11 am)Retorth Wrote: Well imagine if a person got caught in a building fire and suffered 3rd degree burns on his entire body. Imagine being in so much pain... >.<

There's worse...

Powerful acids are much worse than fire. Being eaten alive is much worse than fire. Burning alive is horrible... but if you use your imagination: you realize there is much worse. Diseases can be damn terrible too.... try smallpox?

There are also emotional pains that cut deep... sometimes shatteringly so. Pain in itself is rarely a good reason to give up... but the occasion sometimes comes up. Terminal, incurable, unrelenting, and disabling... that is the only kind of pain that I think should result in euthanasia... and even then only if the person desires to die.

@fr0d0: Life is fragile... but it sure is hardy The tissue damage could kill you... but such an ordeal can be lived through.

Pain wise, there isnt much worse than living through 3rd degree burns on 90% of your body, and only terminal diseases are worth suicide, as some can get pretty bad at the end.

@ saerules

Keep up wont you, smallpox is gone, and there is a vaccine for it anyways.

One of my high school teachers had ALS. He had to fly to Switzerland to end his life. There are a few conditions for which we currently do not have a cure that inevitably end is excruciating prolonged death. With ALS, your lungs stop working and slowly fill with fluid. You're paralyzed at this point.

The libertarian in me wants to say anyone who wants it can get it, but the compassionate human in me knows that things like mental illness create a large grey area.

I think the best solution is to have consultation with psychiatrists and specialist doctors. If someone can convince a panel of well-informed doctors that they should die, and that they are in a sound state of mind, they should have that right.

(October 7, 2009 at 2:10 pm)Meatball Wrote: The libertarian in me wants to say anyone who wants it can get it, but the compassionate human in me knows that things like mental illness create a large grey area.

And that line sums up my view on the matter.

Well said.

EvF

(October 6, 2009 at 7:48 pm)theblindferrengi Wrote: Pain wise, there isnt much worse than living through 3rd degree burns on 90% of your body, and only terminal diseases are worth suicide, as some can get pretty bad at the end.

@ saerules

Keep up wont you, smallpox is gone, and there is a vaccine for it anyways.

It truly was a terrible disease... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox seems terrible. You don't think being bathed in an extremely coercive acid would be horribly worse than being burned? Acids don't just eat you on the outside... they dissolve you to the bone (and the really good(?) ones go further).

It takes quite a fire to burn a human like a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfuric_acid bath. *shudder* But they are both terrible... there can be no denying that.