Thread: Euthanasia

Well, they had a choice, and they exercised their right. I can't see how it's anyone else's business.

I do wonder about the effect that it might have on the doctors performing it though.

why do they keep saying Holland has it..

Holland is not a county for a start.
Second, the netherlands does not have legal Euthanasia. It just turns a blind eye to it, but it is not legal.

My grandmother was knocked off by a doctor in 1958.
He came in, told her she didn't need to suffer anymore, Asked my mother to go make a cup of tea, and then he injected her.
When mum came back he told her she was dead.

Sorry, but the Netherlands does have legislation to control euthanasia

Euthanasia in the Netherlands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's interesting where one would draw the line.
What about if someone thinks they are too fat, or scared of woodworkers, or just had a bad hair day?

"The procedures codified in the law had been a convention of the Dutch medical community for over twenty years."

So in 2002 they did it, Aus have been saying for 30 years that they had it and thats why they should have it here. They have been saying Netherlands had it for more than 10 years.....

As I said my GM got knocked off in 1958, It just had a blind eye turned towards it seeing the same doc signed the death certs...

Probably good now as I expect you need to sign something.

My GM wasn't even asked, the doc took it upon himself to do it.

Originally Posted by _fly_

My GM wasn't even asked, the doc took it upon himself to do it.

In which case it is murder, straight up and down. Although, you'd never know if your GM hadn't made an arrangement with the doctor.

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

In which case it is murder, straight up and down. Although, you'd never know if your GM hadn't made an arrangement with the doctor.

I agree totally!!

Doctors "assisting" patients to peacefully pass away can and does occur in any country, including Australia, even today.

It was probably more common in 1958 as doctors held a different place in our society and were not subject to the same sort of scrutiny (and litigation) that they are subject to today.

That sort of thing happening is hardly related to euthanasia.

May I say that I have observed the Dutch system at close quarters as my wife's cousin opted for euthanasia and the checks and balances built in to the Dutch system certainly precluded any of (let's knock off mum/dad/ aunty for their inheritance) arguments.

There is a lot of uninformed debate about euthanasia in this country and as long as the major churches are against it and hold sway over our politicians it will never be legalised here, it would need a consience vote for a start and neither Liberal or Labor will agree to that in the foreseeable future.

Apparenlty it is quite OK to be kind to one's pet and help it out of its' misery, but that same choice could not possibly be extended to humans.

Whilst not wishing to diminish the magnitude of losing ones sight, I am not sure how a doctor can justify certifying that as unbearable pain therefore allowing him to legally euthanize them? It was tantamount to murder/manslaughter in my view.

To me that is just wrong, yes, the brothers were going to suffer a medical problem but I cannot see how it was going to cause them increasing pain to the point where their life became untenable. People lose their sight all the time and manage very well.

Please don't get me wrong, I think euthanasia should be a viable option in certain circumstances, I just don't believe that the circumstances the brothers felt they were going to be in at some point in the future should constitute valid legal grounds that allows another to assist them end their lives.

Originally Posted by Ray153

To me that is just wrong, yes, the brothers were going to suffer a medical problem but I cannot see how it was going to cause them increasing pain to the point where their life became untenable. People lose their sight all the time and manage very well.

Don't forget that they were deaf from birth as well. Being deaf and blind would be quite something. Their pain was going to be mental pain, and that's every bit as real as physical pain.

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Don't forget that they were deaf from birth as well. Being deaf and blind would be quite something. Their pain was going to be mental pain, and that's every bit as real as physical pain.

I'm not disputing that, I agree that it would be quite something and certainly just as real as physical pain. I am not convinced it could meet the definition of unbearable pain.

Certainly a huge change in their lives and those who provide a level of support and care for them. Same as for those who suffer paralysis from a collision or disease. Still not over the threshold of unbearable pain in my mind, certainly not to the point where a doctor can end the life of another without consequence.

Are suicide and euthanasia the same thing? If not where do they differ? Is it that euthanasia includes the cooperation of a least one other person.

Returning to basics, why is suicide frowned upon and illegal? Is it a hangover from times past when it was very important that everybody survived and contributed to the well-being of a community?

I don't really have a problem with anybody deciding their own destiny if it does not bring hardship on their family and friends. We allow people to do all kinds of destructive things to their bodies while they live and hardly pass comment. What things? Drinking, smoking, drugs even fast food could all be considered an abomination.

Why do we get so upset about dying (that's more rhetorical than literal) after all none of us are going to get out alive? The fact is that few of us, in the West at any rate, really understand about dying. We are taught at painstaking length on how to live our lives, but dying is almost a taboo subject made more mystical by laws.

Dying happens: To all of us: As we get older it happens to more of us around us. I find it absurd that euthanasia is illegal. Naturally it needs checks.

I have a friend whose nineteen year old son recently died of a brain tumour. It was an aggressive cancer, but the boy was one of the human races' treasures. I think it took about three months from go to woe. On his last day the boy asked his father why it was taking so long. By this stage he was down to 38kg from his normal pre-cancerous 75Kg.

My friend spoke to the doctor, who said leave it with me...............

Regards
Paul

why is suicide frowned upon and illegal?

Suicide is not illegal, only attempted suicide.

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Returning to basics, why is suicide frowned upon and illegal?

If it really is illegal, I have to wonder who would be charged for the "offence"?
Jim