Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

Do you think it's fine for one to ask a doctor to help him/her kill him/herself?

Is it ok because it is of one's right to get a "peaceful end" from his/her terminal illness?
Or is it a situation that should be generally unacceptable and diverges against the physician's roles?

Totally fine.

There's been some mad controversy over some 21/22 year old depressed girl who was just granted a death day in one of those right to euthanasia countries, because even though she's gone through therapy and tried tons of different meds she still can't control her depression and still wants to kill herself every day. People are saying depression is not a terminal disease so she shouldn't be allowed to leave the earth peacefully, she should shoot herself or overdose instead. Pretty awful coming from people who claim to want to protect the dignity of life.

If you want to kill yourself it shouldn't matter if you have a terminal disease or not, if you're so convinced that the only way out for you is death, you should not have to die alone and painfully by your own hand. The legal process to get approval to die takes long enough and requires enough money that the people who apply are serious and sure, it's not like a bullied thirteen year old can walk into a hospital and ask to be put down.

I can't stand that a world which heavily emphasizes individual rights would so insistently deny a peaceful end to a long-suffered life. Doesn't seem right at all.

I think there's a lot of truth to this:

So I suppose I'm open to the idea for people beyond those suffering from terminal diseases (for whom this issue is a no-brainer), but only under the condition that a lot of time has passed.

Hmmm… Part of me agrees with Lisa, and the other doesn't. It doesn't seem right to deny a peaceful end for someone, but euthanasia is technically against the law.

Euthanasia can be okay, ONLY if the patient is experiencing / going to experience unbearable pain due to a deadly illness and expresses their full consent to do so. In other words, if the patient really wants to die and is gonna die anyways, it's simply more humane to just kill them.
Any other case of assisted suicide is obviously horrible and should not be allowed. If the patient has a chance of living, then why kill them?

I've always been rather torn by it. On the one side, you don't really want people to suffer in agony for weeks or months, or be stuck in a semi-comatose state before their diaphragm finally gives out. On the other, you don't want people to just kill themselves the second they find out they have cancer or because of a disease/disability that, while burdensome, isn't going to cause a horrible, slow death.

It doesn't have to be against the law, though. With the right safeguards in place, like the legal process to be granted permission to die, even some sort of age restrictions, I can't convince myself there's any reason to deny it. If someone wants to kill their self they're going to kill their self, what these people are asking for is a more peaceful, moral suicide. Many painfully terminally ill patients, no matter what sort of pain they're in, simply can not take their own life. I can't imagine what being in so much pain that you constantly want to die but just can't do it would do to someone's mental well-being.

I work for a lady who owns two businesses and one of them is a care agency for the elderly (mostly wards of the state who have no family so it's even worse), and I've met way too many old people who are so depressed/react violently to their situation or anyone trying to help them and they must feel so trapped but they literally can't do anything but wait to die. Their pain could be so easily ended and we think the more humane thing is to force them to live it. :/

Any other case of assisted suicide is obviously horrible and should not be allowed.

Why?

If the patient has a chance of living, then why kill them?

Because they want to die. Because they consented to the act and think it's the best choice for them. Because it's their life to do with as they please. Don't get me wrong, I would never encourage suicide, I think that in most cases things can get better and life will be worth living. But it's not my life, why should I dictate how others live it? Even if I knew another person's situation better than they did, what basis do I have to strip others of their right over their own life.

I think assisted suicide should be legal.
Not just for the terminally ill but anyone who requests it and is clearly in the correct state of mind.

If they are really going to end their lives, you aren't going to stop them, and I'd much rather they do it safely, cleanly, and quickly. I can't imagine how hard it would be to cut down a loved one, or to clean up their blood out of the tub.

No one agrees to be born, no one has a choice in the matter, therefor we should have the right to leave when we want how we want.

It's a touchy subject, and I'm honestly not sure if it should be legal or not. Nobody should be forced to suffer when they know they're going to die soon anyways. Everyone has to die sometime, why extend it with suffering? There are two main issues I have with euthanasia though.

1. What is considered "terminal" isn't always the same for everyone. Stephen Hawking was diagnosed with ALS in 1963 and was given a life expectancy of two years. He's still alive today. I'm fairly certain that if euthanasia was available at that time, most people with such a debilitating disease would've taken that opportunity to end their own life. The great thing about science is that we always strive to learn something new and improve on things we create. The unfortunate part is that since medicine is also a science, what is today's pharmaceutical pills can be tomorrow's banned drug. I always cringe when I see old ads about doctors recommending cigarettes, or reading about how bloodletting was used to treat disease. But they honestly did not know any better, and although we know more about the world we still don't know everything about our bodies and probably never will.

2. What happens when we find a cure for "terminal" diseases? Do we just shrug and say "oh that's too bad, he didn't have to die?" How would you feel if you euthanized your closest friend/relative, and then learned a week down the line that there was a new cure and he probably would've lived?

Absolutely. Provided its reserved for patients with terminal illnesses only. I'm pretty sure most people would not want to waste away in agony as a tumour crushed their organs, or see themselves trapped in their body as MND shuts their nervous system down. I'm all for euthanasia when it ends the suffering of someone whos going to die anyway. In these situations I think the patient has the right to choose the circumstances of their death.

Of course, theres the issue of the 'slippery slope'; example, elderly people might get pushed towards euthanasia for non-terminal diseases.

But if the issues can be averted, euthanasia and doctor assisted suicide should be fully legal as there is nothing right and moral about keeping someone alive when they aren't even living.

What about for old people who have felt they've accomplished all they can in life?

But why? They're soon going to die anyways, killing them even sooner seems pointless to me.
Besides, there's never too much you can accomplish in life.