Thread: Euthanasia

A merciful end. Avery, I feel for you and the FIL. My mother was in care at 62 years of age, she had dementia. she took another 10 years of care before she was taken while having a stroke. She did not know anyone from about 64 and was sedated a lot of the time to keep her calm. I am ashamed to say I just couldn't bring myself to visit her. There was this frail woman resembling someone who could have been my mother but in my mind it wasn't her. Not the woman who raised 5 kids to be descent adults.
Then my dad ended up with dementia. He had a number of slight strokes that robbed him of speech and his ability to know who came to visit him. He was that way for 10 odd years until the morphine helped him drift off. He was 93-his twin brother went the year before.
I can hear both Mum and Dad saying "If I were to end up like that knock me on the head!" They both mentioned it long before the dementia had taken hold.
Dignity of life must come in to play in these cases.
We had a dear old dog that we all loved. every winter was getting worse for him with his rheumatism so at the age of 17 we took him to the vet. It was what seemed to be a merciful end for him.
I think I am in favour of euthanasia.

The problem with such ways of thinking is where do you draw the line or where does it end. So many argue along esoteric and or philosophical lines (basically wishy washy bullshite) that there is no real standard to measure against (certainly heard enough of it in this thread)...

You can see the evolution of these societal "values" (I use that word very loosely) in that they've now killed people simply because they were going to go blind and they're now pushing to allow minors to off themselves... Again where does it end. Next they'll be saying anyone over 75 is taking up space... and then it will be 70... These sorts of trends in society aren't slippery slopes they're cliffs. Many mock the laws that make suicide illegal mostly because they're obtuse... Those laws are society's and government's making a stand for what a civilised society should stands for.

Waiting.

Originally Posted by _fly_

why is suicide frowned upon and illegal?

Suicide is not illegal, only attempted suicide.

Fly

I think both are illegal, but the legal system has experienced extreme difficulty in prosecuting the successful perpetrators. Even the law, unsatisfactory that it is, does not pursue the draconian lengths of "whipping through the fleet" (where the sentence was completed irrespective of whether the prisoner had passed on). It may well be an economic constraint rather than a legal or moral one.

In regard to the unsuccessful attempts, I think it is normally regarded as a cry for help. I would be interested to know if anybody has actually been prosecuted.

Either way the law is an a**e on this one. There is absolutely no point in any law that is, in practical terms, unenforceable.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Chippin Away

The problem with such ways of thinking is where do you draw the line or where does it end. So many argue along esoteric and or philosophical lines (basically wishy washy bullshite) that there is no real standard to measure against (certainly heard enough of it in this thread)...

You can see the evolution of these societal "values" (I use that word very loosely) in that they've now killed people simply because they were going to go blind and they're now pushing to allow minors to off themselves... Again where does it end. Next they'll be saying anyone over 75 is taking up space... and then it will be 70... These sorts of trends in society aren't slippery slopes they're cliffs. Many mock the laws that make suicide illegal mostly because they're obtuse... Those laws are society's and government's making a stand for what a civilised society should stands for.

Chippin

I think it is a little misleading to quote specific instances of cases where possibly we don't have the full background information. Yes, I know I did exactly the same thing, except that I was familiar with the scenario.

In your second statement, it seems to me that the wishes of the terminally ill and those in chronic pain are being confused with a government mentality along the lines of Orwell's 1984. I don't really think we are quite at the stage where the government is going to execute those over a certain age. At least, at your threshold of 70 it is starting to get uncomfortably close for my personal comfort .

We are talking about:

1. A person choosing to die while in full control of their mental powers.
2. Relatives making a decision on behalf of a terminally ill patient experiencing extreme pain.

There is nothing esoteric, philosophical, insidious or even difficult about this. The government doesn't come into it, except to allow it to take place under guidelines. The fact is it already happens and has done for many years unofficially and of course, as it stands, illegally.

Regards
Paul

I am only referring to the law in Victoria. The "crime" of suicide was abolished years ago and with it the offence of attempted suicide. What remains an offence is to be party to a suicide pact, i.e. attempt suicide and survive. That will bring a charge of manslaughter.

Those who attempt suicide in Victoria can be detained under section 10 of the Mental Health Act and conveyed to hospital or taken before a medical practitioner. It is procedural, not a means of bringing criminal charges.

Originally Posted by Ray153

I am only referring to the law in Victoria. The "crime" of suicide was abolished years ago and with it the offence of attempted suicide. What remains an offence is to be party to a suicide pact, i.e. attempt suicide and survive. That will bring a charge of manslaughter.

Those who attempt suicide in Victoria can be detained under section 10 of the Mental Health Act and conveyed to hospital or taken before a medical practitioner. It is procedural, not a means of bringing criminal charges.

Thanks Ray

In Victoria the punishment is hidden (a bit like the penalty for bigamy - two wives ) Institutionalism; Much worse than death. I'm mildly surprised that Victoria hasn't invoked "Catch 22" on this one.

Apologies. This is a serious subject .

Regards
Paul

Interesting debate so far, I'm glad I started the discussion.

Let me give you a scenario, which I've had to deal with many times as a nurse:

Your relative is on the ward and is deteriorating very slowly and in a significant amount of pain. They're being fed through a tube in their nose which goes to their stomach. Conservatively, medical staff expect your relative to last for at least 2-3 months with ongoing medical treatment. They're in a great deal of pain, are incontinent and rely on nurses to shower them. The doctors have approached you and have asked to withdraw treatment and make your relative comfortable. Expected time before they pass away: 2-3 days.

Scenario 1: The family agree to the withdrawal of treatment. All tubes and lines are removed, the patient is allowed to eat and drink as they like and they have received some very generous analgesia for their pain. The patient passes away peacefully 48 hours later.

Scenario 2: The family are horrified at the thought that medical staff suggested that treatment be withdrawn. The patient lingers for another 8 weeks and eventually an artery in their stomach bursts and they drown in their own blood. Before their passing the patient repeatedly asks not to have anything done to them however their family insist on all active treatment. The patient develops bed sores from the constant diarrhoea, constantly complains about the pain and is constantly ferried around the hospital from all the tests they have to endure.

IMHO everyone should have an advanced care plan in respect to their end of life care. I would absolutely detest my family going against my wishes. I would like to die with dignity and free of pain. Euthanasia, in a very diluted form, does occur in every hospital everyday though. Legalising euthanasia would assist the moral dilemma Doctors and Nurses face every day.

Scott, I suspect many of us have had to go through the same scenario as relatives. The question, "should we resuscitate if .." has to be faced by those of us who are seeing their parents in extreme dementia etc.
It's not pleasant watching someone slowly die and lose all semblance of the person they were. My grandmother said, "It's a bugger waiting to die".
To demean the whole debate as being the thin end of the wedge or even worse as, "wishy washy bullshite", is to deny our humanity and the true nature of our existence.
ps should have said that I hope the caring professions soon have the moral dilemma removed or at least eased.

Scott,

Your experience and views on this are worth are worth shouting out loud. Rational, reasonable and compassionate.

Thank you.

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

We are talking about:

1. A person choosing to die while in full control of their mental powers.
2. Relatives making a decision on behalf of a terminally ill patient experiencing extreme pain.

There is nothing esoteric, philosophical, insidious or even difficult about this. The government doesn't come into it, except to allow it to take place under guidelines. The fact is it already happens and has done for many years unofficially and of course, as it stands, illegally.

Regards
Paul

My experience.

My father had carried an Abdominal Aortic Aneurism for some years. His doctor had said, privately to myself, that he had not seen one of this size in a living individual.

All of the research that I had done indicated a relatively quick passing when the time came. Minutes were spoken of.

Of course, my old man, being the hard and defiant bugger that he was, wouldn't have it that way.

One early evening he was taken to hospital suffering from severe pain in the kidney area of his lower back. I got a call in the early hours of the morning to come up to the hospital. Upon arriving I found my father with tears streaming down his cheeks in obvious agony.

I asked them to take the pain away, and they did.

Given the inevitability of the result, and believe me once it starts there is no stopping it, I'm fairly sure that it was the law that stopped the carers from doing the right thing. It seems they needed the instruction to do what was right.

That happened nearly 3 years ago now. I am sad that he is not here now. I'm pleased they took the pain away. I'm a little sad that they did not do it sooner.

The staff in our hospitals do a marvellous job. Some times hard decisions need to be made. I am in favour of ending life with dignity.

Cheers

As a matter of interest to some, here's an Australian website which we (most hospitals) refer patients and their families to:

Respecting Patient Choices (Advanced Care Planning).

Let me share a little story with you from my nursing days in Intensive Care. I will always find this man the most inspirational I've EVER looked after as a nurse. In fact I'll remember him for the rest of my life. In short he was a VERY fit man who had a push bike accident and broke his neck. In Intensive Care he asked to have all support turned off. BUT, in an act of extreme selflessness, he asked for his organs to be donated. This man was perfectly lucid and able to communicate his every wish. His family respected his wishes and made a website in his honour:

In memory of Robert Graham

RIP Robert