Voluntary euthanasia or is this subject taboo?

Mallory, I'm curious... why do you feel that specific population groups would be targeted? Are you concerned because that happened in other countries when pograms and genocides were carried out by diabolical maniacs?

Gershun, you are right, there is such a poster out there, and I hope she/he stays put. Mallory, are you also seeing the black helicopters over your house? Liberal conspiracy to kill the Amish and other non believers? No one here or anywhere else is suggesting such nonsense. I don't give a damn how the Amish or the Baptists or the Catholics want to die or what they believe. God wants you to have a slow painful death, go for it. The point is, how do you want your decline and death handled.......People's wishes should be respected regardless of the religious beliefs of those in power. And btw, in case you haven't noticed, most of those in power these days are pandering to the God squad. Even Donald Trump showed up at a rally waving a bible around just today.

OMG she's still there, still tortured over her experience with hospice and eager to convince everyone who posts on that thread that hospice is a massive conspiracy to murder unwary seniors.
If the maniacs ever take over our countries they won't have to resort to using sleight of hand to euthanize the undesirables, all of history's megalomaniacs seemed quite proud to take credit for their evil deeds.

Wasn't there someone named Flowgo on another thread just like this one going on about Doctors murdering old people? I seem to recall she eventually scared everyone else away with her paranoid delusions..........just saying.

Falcon yes you should have the right to live your life as you choose, and also die as you choose, and nobody else's belief system can get in the way of that. Likewise, for example, the Amish get to live as they choose, die as they choose, and nobody else's belief system can get in the way of that. However the way politics is going these days, is trending towards extreme intolerance for people with Orthodox beliefs, to the point where having a religious conviction instead of being seen as the person's right, is seen as intolerance. What will happen in the future, if this trend continues with no rational tempering, is the belief in having a right to natural death (even if that means suffering that you yourself would avoid via suicide ) this conservative belief will be seen as silly, irrational, and an inconvenience to supposedly more superior, liberal persons in control....and they will legislate a "morality" of euthanizing anyone with alzheimer's or other uncurable, highly expensive conditions. Scads of liberals who sign up for voluntary suicide, will pressure the minority religions who do not hold that belief. There are tons of examples where minorities are pressured to "conform" to a majority opinion. It has always been the problem for minorities, they are picked on for their wierd beliefs or appearance, and sidelined. Can you imagine being elderly, sick, poor, and a Catholic, in a society that has relegated Catholics to 2nd class citizen? If voluntary suicide is easily available, with political advertising stating "everyone's in favor of it", "its the right thing to do" , and "the beauty of your best years can be preserved without the pain of disease," these immense pressures on society to simply do away with burdensome 2nd class citizens will be overwhelming, as in, "After all, suicide is the rational thing to do when you're sick, and costing everyone else so much money; That money could be better spent on bridges; Shame on you for using up resources."

I am not a believer so FOR ME and only for me that does not come into my decision making process.

To put the boot on the other foot, when a person requests to die rather than to be left 'existing' and that they make that request sanely and in full knowledge of what existence means to them why is that so wrong? Especially if there is no religious or cultural attachment for them. I understand that those two factors will make others opposed to assisted suicide FOR THEM but equally why should their opinions impact on MY beliefs?

I have listed a myriad of conditions but basically when I can no longer be left to look after myself, when someone has to wipe my behind and feed me etc then I (note me not anyone else), I don't want to continue living and want assisted suicide. As far as I am concerned I will have lived my useful life in the way I chose and at that point I want to be allowed to die in the way of my choosing....with dignity, peacefully and alone, having been able tell my children how much I loved them and that it is now their time to shine brightly.

If this offends anyone then it wasn't intended to do so but this is my standpoint, and I have a right to have it, yet I don't have a right to have it enacted. That to me seems also unfair.

Incidentally I am in principal opposed to euthanasia with the exception as mentioned above of dealing with cyclical pain of a terminally ill patient and even then only with the family's agreement or with a previous directive. Euthanasia. again for me, is something totally different whereby the individual's choices are not necessarily taken into consideration..

Assisted Suicide soon will not be just for seniors. What about a teenager? Who decides? The government? The family? The doctor who already want to kill off seniors. Let's not play God there is only one and we are not Him.

Ah well you see you are wrong if you think you have rights...you don't. You write an end of life directive - a living will - I have one in place BUT and here is the rub. If you request to be allowed to die through lack of nutrition - the ONLY way they could do it currently in UK ......then there is a little loophole they use - they call it does the person mean it. So they offer liquid which you will naturally sip - it is a conditioned response. Therefore the argument is that you have reneged on your previous decision. I am absolutely in favour of assisted suicide FOR ME not for anyone else. I believe we have a right to opt for it while we are sane and I believe it is a decision that should be considered very very seriously before making such a directive.

Hospitals dealing in end of life care where pain is involved often get into a cleft stick situation. My father had cancer, his body was riddled with it. His lungs filled with fluid which they had to drain, he was in pain and they gave him morphine which dehydrated him and he would die if they didn't give him a drip. They gave him a drip and his lungs filled with fluid and he was in pain.

When all the treatment for whatever disease/illness becomes cyclical I believe in my heart added morphine would give a more dignified death and the ONLY time a doctor should be given the right to make that decision. It is not for others to decide although I would still maintain they have the right to ask the doctor NOT to do this if it goes against their beliefs/culture. I think that three signatures from 3 doctors would override the need for court cases for malpractice. My father never wanted to die he wanted to live but he also didn't want to live hooked up to machines.

I want more..... I want to die once I need 24/7 care - I believe that I have a right to make that decision and I have made that decision but in the UK the courts will not allow it to happen - the only thing they can do is observe a DNR so I pray I have a heart attack when that time comes - it is my ONLY way out.

:-O

I think I heard someone say even if Hilary wins there will still be a bush in the White House. LOL

LOL Jessie!

Hey, I resemble that remark. :-D

Jessie I don't live in the states but if Trump managed to somehow squeak out a win I fear for the world. Seriously I think ugly old women with fat butts aren't the only people who should fear for their lives it that idiot wins.

For lack of a better phrase, I think we are picking the fly s....t out of the pepper at this point. Five states have some form of assited death/suicide. It can be done. I'm not aware of any massacre of unwanted old people in Oregon.

This thread had the word euthanasia in the title so I think we are floundering around a bit with different issues.

No one wants to be in the position to grant life or death. But many of us have had discussions on this forum about "How long is this going to drag on?" My Mom is 83, miserable, drags through each day of meds, insulin, sleep repeat. Her daily mantra is "How's a person supposed to live like this?" Good question......She's talked about ending her life and I think once we lose Dad to dementia or death she would probably shut down and slip away. I would respect her decision to do so. I would not lecture her on how valuable life is or how much she has to live for because when Dad is gone it's simply not true.

That would not be assited suicide but not far from it. She's has very clear DNR and living will and I may have to fend off some religious relatives from forcing life extending procedures but I would fight them with all I had to abide by my Moms wishes.

This is a morbid topic but it should be discussed and considered by anyone who's a caregiver for elders as we are all facing the issue of death and dying. It's a big part of our duties to our elders and it is incumbent upon us to do what is best for our loved ones, not prolong a horrible and agonizing life in line with our own moral or religious beliefs.

I don't know, Gershun. You mentioned Tr*mp a while back. He might decide that any ugly, old, or plump woman should be humanely put down. :P

I really can't believe that people are actually going to vote for that guy. If Hill*ry gets the nomination for her party, though, it may be an amusing campaign. Tr*mp would say we couldn't have a president that had a butt like that. I'm seriously wondering what the US is coming to. I hope the young folks can pull us out of this craziness. The older ones seem to be lost in the crazy forest at the moment.

mallory maybe if Hitler or Stalin rise from their graves things like that could happen. But seriously you don't really believe that do you? Pruning of old people?
Hunting down those who promote assisted suicide? Come on. I highly doubt any of those things will happen.

Or, someone at age 60 signs an advance assisted suicide document for certain amount of incapacity, and 25 yrs later, the world government has become radically changed and the doctors have been forced to make drastic choices....they might decide to do away with those who had in the past promoted assisted suicide, even thought they don't have an incapacity, because, well, they're in favor of suicide...so they misinterpret and broaden that and make it apply to the new world situation. Or maybe population pressures make it "favorable " to begin a systematic pruning of old people. Who are they going to start with?

Just to be clear, I am not in favor of euthanasia, and do not have a "death list ". And I am very wary of assisted suicide because it is very close to euthanasia. If someone at age 60 signs a document saying they wish to have assistance in suicide, in the event they cannot carry it out, in case they get alzheimer's, and then 25 yrs later they develop dementia symptoms....and someone drags out this 25 yr old document -- but at some point the person had changed their mind about wanting assisted suicide.....well that is a problem.

There is a big difference between assisted suicide and euthanasia. I will never agree with a system that allows taking someone elses life, no matter how pitiful it is thought to be.

I agree to Gladimhere, same thing happened to me....NO WAY could I assist, all I could do was stay up with him, a week later he was at the hospital and I asked about hospice, that was the beginning of the end

Willco, Windy! ;)

That's what I'm talking about Mallory, we need those death panels! Your death list is much shorter than mine...........But mine would be more specific.

Huh???

Yeah, if Donald Trump wins the election.............

Weren't there twin brothers somewhere in EU, they were blind and deaf (?) and both felt their lives were just not worth continuing....this was in 2014 (?) and they did both take their lives and their government supported them. No charges filed against the doctor (s) that supplied the poison medicine.
There are also reports of elderly citizens in some EU countries that are euthanized, and it is accepted as normal.
I don't know if I could accept this, because it is a half a millimeter away from euthanizing those who are not PC, or speak out against the government can (now) be prosecuted as domestic terrorists. And with all the digital storage of every one of our phone calls, texts, emails, and donations, all of these are being stored in huge data banks, in Utah and elsewhere. The government is doing this. I'm not making this up. Some day they might just decide all Catholics or all Mormons or all Irish or all Italians are threats, and must be euthanized to protect the "rights" of the PC crowd.

This whole business of taking your own live is such a slippery slope. I used to date a man who was an alcoholic. I accompanied him one night to an AA meeting just to be supportive. He recognized a friend of his in front of us. He tapped him on the shoulder and this person turned around. The whole right side of his face was gone because of a botched suicide attempt.

So if you can't do the job yourself and do it right, don't try. By the way, this man was in his twenties. When it comes to deciding quality of life, then there is the whole "oh, I am so depressed, life isn't worth living anymore" type of thinking. Hell I am super depressed these days missing my Mom. I think I have the right to off myself.

I don't know. Like I said yesterday, this topic is so tedious.

Country, while I appeciate the discussion, and you make some interesting arguments, I stand by my position.

You listed many things that can go wrong, be misused, fraudulent acts, speeding Granny's death cause she's a burden etc. You apparently feel that wills and poas are not to be trusted. Is there fraud? Contention and lawsuits? Hell yes, but it's the legal foundation we have worked with for hundreds of years.

You make wills and end of life directives when you are of sound mind with the intent of your wishes being carried out when you are no longer of sound mind. I would venture a guess that your paperwork is in order. I respect your opinions and your many comments on this forum.

Being the sensible person you are, you have raised questions about the pitfalls of ending life. But I'll venture another guess: I'd bet if you were at my death bed, knowing my stated wishes and you were my legal designee, I think you would instruct hospice to pull the feeding tube and give me the largest dose of morphine allowed by law. And if you come across some nutty relative of mine yelling that I could have a few more days of gods intended life, please call security.

Windy, I have strong convictions about people not being killed without whomever is responsible being held to account in this world. I don't presume to be privy to God's view of the matter, though I have a modicum of confidence that His judgement will be both true and compassionate and, who knows, eventually revealed to us.

As - I've forgotten her name and I don't want to confuse her with someone else, but you know the one, the lady on the thread about hospice shuffling her mother (and everybody else's mother to hear her tell it) off this mortal coil uninvited - anyway, her. As she points out with rather more justification, ends are currently hastened; and let's not be naïve about it, we know they are. That's a side effect of effective palliative care; it is justifiable in terms of patient interest; and as things stand any question of intent is scrutinised and end of life care teams are held to account.

Introduce meaningful legislation that allows assisted suicide to take place in anything but the most rarefied circumstances, and what will happen is that that critical scrutiny will be bypassed and instead there will be a rubber stamp process. Inconvenient old ladies will get hurried along and no one will be answerable. Give it time, and it will become normal. In a century, our descendants will look back and shake their heads at our insistence on forcing tired old people to finish the course.

The point about the patient authorising the directives would be reassuring, if only the systems that are supposed to ensure that people doing this are acting freely and with informed consent were anything like as effective as they ought to be. Same currently applies to wills and POAs. Are these documents always signed by a person making a free and considered choice? In a pig's eye they are. But the law assumes so.

Relatives don't have to be monstrously greedy to want to be rid of their dying loved ones. They could just be bored, or squeamish, or have a pressing appointment elsewhere. Seriously they might: you know how it is, the child lives on the other side of the world and really thought it would be all over by now and has to start weighing up whether they'll need to change their return flight and how much is that going to cost... They could be like my sister, and be broken-hearted at the thought that their intelligent and fastidious mother would - in mother's own words - "never want to get like that." We are not good at waiting. And especially not when we're uncomfortable.

The difficulty lies in getting to the real-time wishes of the dying person. What they felt about wanting a clean and dignified end some time before they faced it may not be what they feel about it now, when it's happening. I don't think it can be done, or at least not well enough for the certainty you need to have before you make the decision to kill another person.

It's one thing for people to step outside guidelines and then have to make a very good case for why they did it. It's another to relax the guidelines so that they don't have to prove a thing. That's what I'm afraid of.

But seriously folks. It could be made very simple. We are already able to express our end of life directives in a legal and binding way through living wills and other documents. There is no reason a person should not be able to state that when the quality of life is no more we can have our deaths assited rather than drug out for hours, days, weeks or months.

I strongly believe in the hospice system. We fully and legally accept that a judgement has been made that death is imminent. We abide by the patients living will. I do hospice volunteer work. But it is very difficult to watch the dying process even with compassionate care and comfort. Why should the dying and their families be drug through this process of death watch.

And keep in mind, any life ending directives would have been authoized by the patient, not the government, death panels, or greedy relatives. You have strong religious convictions about life and death? Fine. Don't fill out a living will. Have your life drug out to the very end until "God" takes you. But keep your beliefs to yourself and don't attempt to dictate to the rest of us how we should live or die.

....Just stop eating and you'll be gone in a few weeks.