Euthanasia for the Depressed?

[The Valkyrie]

If you look back at the original article, she has been supposedly been treated for the past 3 years in a psychiatric facility.  So she has tried treatment.  If it were working, she would not be wanting to die.

Those of you who are against her doing this, do you think that mental problems produce less suffering than physical problems?  How long should she have to suffer to please you?

What does "pleasing us" have to do with this issue.

Please don't try the guilt trip tactics others try on us - it won't work.

Depression is a complex issue (trust me, I know), as is modern medicine (again, from one who knows).

I don't think euthanasia is the way to go for people with mental illness.  I don't even agree with it for others, unless they have no chance, are in serious pain, and there's absolutely no hope for them.

If we start euthanizing people because they have depression, where does it end?  And what if, within a short timeframe, a new drug or treatment appears on the market

[Jenny A]

...

I hate to say it but self inflicted suicide is always available, why is she asking permission if she really wants to complete her actions?

Many times, self-inflicted suicide attempts can go badly.  For example, people who shoot themselves in the head with a gun do not always die.  And if they do not die, then they are generally worse off than they were before.  The point isn't to suffer and then die; the point is to die as cleanly and easily as possible.

Also, many means of death are unavailable to the general public.  I cannot go and buy any drugs I want from a pharmacy.  I need a prescription for many of the drugs they sell.  So if I want to use some of the better drugs for this purpose, I need to get someone's permission to get them.

If they sold death kits "over the counter," then it might eliminate the need to get someone's help in choosing a good death in most cases.  But they do not sell such things.

Yes it is quite possible to flub a suicide.  Many flubbed suicides weren't very serious attempts.  Serious attempts usually succeed. And if you fail, you can always try again.  Death on the other hand is rather permanent.

[Jenny A]

On a strictly personal note, I fully support this. I need to be with my Sam one way or another so bad I can't breathe.

Don't really know you but have to ask, would Sam want this?

Yeah, losing a love hurts like nothing else.  But I must admit, were I Sam, I'd say to stick around.

[Dystopia]

I don't understand the problem being discussed here - Do you want to end your life? You can do it anytime - Even if there was a law saying it is illegal to commit suicide, as long as you succeed there's nothing stopping you or anybody from doing it. The question seems to be if the State should actively allow someone who is physically capable of committing suicide of requesting medical procedures to do it. Do I care much? Nah, but grow the fuck up. Seriously, euthanasia is a serious decision and the fact there are doctors who clearly violate their own ethical code (that orders the preservation of life) to attend your needs is already pretty good - The State shouldn't fund (I'm saying this because Holland has universal healthcare) someone's desires to end their own life when it clearly isn't needed. There's better ways to spend resources and doctors' time. Euthanasia for terminal illnesses and suffering, for those who unfortunately can't kill themselves on their own and need to end it - But for physically capable individuals? Nah. Grow up. The state and doctors are not there to serve your own mundane needs, and it's time people realize that. The State and medical institutions are not responsible for ending your life for any reason you may provide.

[Ravenshire]

If we start euthanizing people because they have depression, where does it end?

It begins and ends with patients capable of giving informed consent deciding it's time to die.

And what if, within a short timeframe, a new drug or treatment appears on the market

What ifs are about as effective as arguments as guilt trips are.

[Ravenshire]

The State shouldn't fund (I'm saying this because Holland has universal healthcare) someone's desires to end their own life when it clearly isn't needed.

Should the state be on the hook for the medical costs of botched suicides? I would imagine that would quickly get more expensive than euthanasia.

[The Valkyrie]

If we start euthanizing people because they have depression, where does it end?

It begins and ends with patients capable of giving informed consent deciding it's time to die.

And what if, within a short timeframe, a new drug or treatment appears on the market

What ifs are about as effective as arguments as guilt trips are.

Let them give their consent, but that doesn't answer the question entirely.  If someone decides they just want to die simply "because", why should a doctor be brought in to kill them?  They have the ability to take their own life.

Yes, "what ifs" aren't all that effective.

But, with medical breakthroughs coming as quickly as they are, it does have a bearing on this issue.

And a "what if" is better than a, "whoops, oh well . . .".

[Dystopia]

Actually it begins with the government allowing it in the first place. Because euthanasia is a procedure like any other, it needs regulation and a law approving its existence - Otherwise it is illegal. For a law to be passed legalizing something, a valid reason must be given. What is the most common reason for legalizing euthanasia? Well there's two actually - Pain/suffering and the inability to terminate your life so you need medical support. If only consent is needed without further due, then we might as well create specialists just for the purpose of euthanising people, because any one for any reason can come up to a doctor and say "Hey, I don't want to live anymore". It's extremely complicated to allow this given that it violates the first principle any doctor swears to respect - The preservation of life. Those who have an interpretation that allows to bypass the principle and perform euthanasia are the reason why it happens in the first place. It is a right, but it is also a commodity.

[Pyrrho]

---

If you look back at the original article, she has been supposedly been treated for the past 3 years in a psychiatric facility.  So she has tried treatment.  If it were working, she would not be wanting to die.

Those of you who are against her doing this, do you think that mental problems produce less suffering than physical problems?  How long should she have to suffer to please you?

What does "pleasing us" have to do with this issue.

Please don't try the guilt trip tactics others try on us - it won't work.

Depression is a complex issue (trust me, I know), as is modern medicine (again, from one who knows).

I don't think euthanasia is the way to go for people with mental illness.  I don't even agree with it for others, unless they have no chance, are in serious pain, and there's absolutely no hope for them.

---

If we start euthanizing people because they have depression, where does it end?  And what if, within a short timeframe, a new drug or treatment appears on the market

And what if there isn't a new drug or treatment within a short timeframe?  That is the more likely situation.

If you don't want to die, don't choose it.  But other people's lives are their lives, not yours.

[Dystopia]

Should the state be on the hook for the medical costs of botched suicides? I would imagine that would quickly get more expensive than euthanasia.

That is only true if the number of failed suicides is higher compared to accomplished/successful ones - Ultimately this isn't just about costs but about valid reasons for the government and medical institutions to care about it when healthcare's responsibility is preserving life and not ending it. Why not create a new industry just for assisted suicide then? It seems reasonable and it would eliminate any further controversies surrounding the problem.