EUTHINASIA
- Thread starter ANNE
- Start date
Harry, are you sure euthanisia is illegal?? In Holland it has been legal for years...........
;D ;D ;D
He he he, I didn't disappoint either!!
Seriously, it's a bit above me too. I really don't feel comfortable with the subject. I am fundamentally against it as I believe life to be such a special thing and really so precious, I don't think man has the right to interfere with the course of nature. I am thus also passionately against the death penalty and cannot understand suicide, but obviously the subject is much deeper and this is my one-sided opinion. Anyone else anyhting to say?
;D ;D ;D
He he he, I didn't disappoint either!!
Seriously, it's a bit above me too. I really don't feel comfortable with the subject. I am fundamentally against it as I believe life to be such a special thing and really so precious, I don't think man has the right to interfere with the course of nature. I am thus also passionately against the death penalty and cannot understand suicide, but obviously the subject is much deeper and this is my one-sided opinion. Anyone else anyhting to say?
It's hard for me to evaluate. I do agree Janet, but unless you've ever suffererd, I think it's hard to be able to say how you would feel. Thankfully I've never been in that situation and I find it hard to believe I would ever end my life. I agree on the sound mind bit, though, definitely.
Researched this in the late 80's during nurse training, I can still to this day say that I have not been able to make up my mind. To be in such a debilitated state, with no quality of life must be the most horrendous thing to have to endure, but it was not legalised during the 80's debates, as the government thought that it would frighten people, especially the elderly.
I think if the person is of sound mind then it should be their choice, but experts still disagree on what constitutes a sound mind
I think if the person is of sound mind then it should be their choice, but experts still disagree on what constitutes a sound mind
Jo - if your completely against humans interfering with life & death - does this mean you wouldn't have a life saving transplant or blood transfusion? Or let your children have them if needed? It's all the same. We don't mind interfering with death to save people who we feel are not at their time to go - yet we shy away when it comes to people who are terminally ill & would like the right to choose to die with diginity.
I could sit and cry when I hear stories of how people have been imprisoned for not wanting their loved ones to suffer
The patiant should be able to choose a dignified end if they so wish. Why should people have to suffer in pain. Or live a life of no life.
It's a poor do when animals have a right not to suffer and are put out of there pain and suffering.
Same thing when it's your time to go and your brought back against all your wishes.
The patiant should be able to choose a dignified end if they so wish. Why should people have to suffer in pain. Or live a life of no life.
It's a poor do when animals have a right not to suffer and are put out of there pain and suffering.
Same thing when it's your time to go and your brought back against all your wishes.
Sorry Jo i agree with it.Would you see a pet suffer, no.Well its just the same thing with humans.If there is no way out why make somebody suffer even more by making them wait for what is inevitable anyway.As to the death penalty.In child abuse cases i am all for it.With the D.N.A. stuuf nowadays its 99.9% and even the pill only gives you that guarentee.
[quote author=Mik_Dickinson link=board=anything;num=1063153959;start=0#10 date=09/10/03 at 22:26:03]As to the death penalty.In child abuse cases i am all for it.With the D.N.A. stuuf nowadays its 99.9% and even the pill only gives you that guarentee.[/quote]
I believe we started this topic somwhere before but you didn't come back to it I noticed?
I believe we started this topic somwhere before but you didn't come back to it I noticed?
[quote author=ShortStuff link=board=anything;num=1063153959;start=0#8 date=09/10/03 at 21:01:29]Jo - if your completely against humans interfering with life & death - does this mean you wouldn't have a life saving transplant or blood transfusion? Or let your children have them if needed? It's all the same. We don't mind interfering with death to save people who we feel are not at their time to go - yet we shy away when it comes to people who are terminally ill & would like the right to choose to die with diginity.[/quote]
Not the same subject. Jo's talking about medical intervention to end a life, not preserve it.
Not the same subject. Jo's talking about medical intervention to end a life, not preserve it.
Well after seeing my Grandfather die of cancer and go through it all in the hospital with Morphine injections.Watching him slowly go for days.Wilting away basically before your eyes.In the end he was not half the man he was.He also asked them not to give him the morphine injections .He thought it would end quicker, but no his wishes were not respected.Still he died as we all will do and i thought it would have been better to give him an injection there to end it all.Would have been a relief for my grandad.After all it was inevitable.So they made him go through real pain in the last 5 days.B******Ds.An animal would not have suffered that much
Sorry about that last sentence but it is a subject i really do feel strongly about
Sorry about your grandfather Mik, but giving morphine actually helps end it, as it depresses the nerves of the respiratory centre of the brain therefore stopping breathing. If your granddad was in pain they should have given him more. I asked them to with my gran, who also died of cancer, and it did the trick, died within 2 days of them upping the dose. 
Still it would have been nice to see him have died with more dignity.He was a gentleman until the day he died and he deserved more.Legailsed Euthanasia would have given him a better way out
The Mcmillan nurses due an excellent job and some patiants handle pain better than others and I do think it should be a matter of choice. Dignity, should be allowed to the end.
It bad enough haveing the fear of the unknown and the worry about leaving loved ones behind without the added fear of someone getting into trouble for helping retain that dignity. helping
It bad enough haveing the fear of the unknown and the worry about leaving loved ones behind without the added fear of someone getting into trouble for helping retain that dignity. helping
Totally agree with Shortstuff
couldn't have put it better myself!
You alway here the term "Playing God", but it works both ways not just in death but in saving, administering drugs/treatments its all invasive and is it right to interfere with nature by ending or even preserving life?
This is an area i have researched a great deal on, I have read many ethics books & wrote many an essay on Euthanasia, its a huge interest of mine.
Do i aggree with it..........still not sure it could be open to abuse by the medical profession, ie a person with not much hope in one bed and a young girl needing a heart transplant in the next bed???? how much hope would they really have for the first patient? or would it seem more easier or ethical to help the youg girl??
How scary is that scenario?
couldn't have put it better myself!
You alway here the term "Playing God", but it works both ways not just in death but in saving, administering drugs/treatments its all invasive and is it right to interfere with nature by ending or even preserving life?
This is an area i have researched a great deal on, I have read many ethics books & wrote many an essay on Euthanasia, its a huge interest of mine.
Do i aggree with it..........still not sure it could be open to abuse by the medical profession, ie a person with not much hope in one bed and a young girl needing a heart transplant in the next bed???? how much hope would they really have for the first patient? or would it seem more easier or ethical to help the youg girl??
How scary is that scenario?