Euthanasia is the process of painlessly helping a terminally ill person to die. Known also as assisted suicide or mercy killing, euthanasia is illegal for humans in some countries and legal to some.
What's your stand? Discussion starts..
the message board for Dubai English speaking community
Euthanasia is the process of painlessly helping a terminally ill person to die. Known also as assisted suicide or mercy killing, euthanasia is illegal for humans in some countries and legal to some.
In April 2002, the Netherlands became the first country in the world to legalize euthanasia. If a physician in the Netherlands follows the strict legal requirements for committing voluntary euthanasia or assisted suicide, the doctor will not be prosecuted.
The basics requirements are as follows:
The patient must have already been in the doctor's care for a period of time.
The patient's suffering is unbearable, and she or he has no hope of recovery.
The patient makes a deliberate and voluntary request that she or he has discussed thoroughly with the doctor.
The doctor consults a colleague who agrees that these criteria have been met.
Belgium became the second country to legalize euthanasia in September 2002. The Belgian law also lays out specific requirements for the doctor and patient, similar to the Dutch law.
But euthanasia is only one option available to terminally ill patients. Voluntary euthanasia means a person ends his or her life through lethal injection administered by a doctor. Assisted suicide is considered to be death by oral ingestion of lethal drugs, usually prescribed by a doctor. Passive euthanasia is when life-support systems are disconnected from a terminally ill patient.
Switzerland allows suicide assisted by doctors and those without medical training, but euthanasia is not legal in the country. Since 1937, the Swiss criminal code has stated that suicide is not a crime, and it may be assisted for altruistic reasons. It's only a crime if someone assists the suicide out of negative motivation or for financial gain.
The U.S. state of Oregon enacted a physician-assisted suicide law in November 1994. This allows doctors to prescribe a lethal dose of medication to terminally ill patients who meet certain requirements, including state residency. The U.S. government has tried to challenge this law but has been unsuccessful so far.
Nick81 wrote:Being against and citing a bunch of religious stuff (not to say something else out of respect for everyone here) is easy. You can't possibly put yourself in someone else's shoes. Someone who's suffering from a terminal disease and is in constant pain.
EDIT: Note that I didn't even state what my position is. I just can't for the very reason I mentioned above. How can I possibly write what I think about something so extreme? To know you have no chance of recovery, feeling intense pain day and night...
P.S: As tolerant as I can be, the 1st one that writes that miracle do happen, will be bit. You have been warned.
asc_26 wrote:Nick81 wrote:Being against and citing a bunch of religious stuff (not to say something else out of respect for everyone here) is easy. You can't possibly put yourself in someone else's shoes. Someone who's suffering from a terminal disease and is in constant pain.
EDIT: Note that I didn't even state what my position is. I just can't for the very reason I mentioned above. How can I possibly write what I think about something so extreme? To know you have no chance of recovery, feeling intense pain day and night...
P.S: As tolerant as I can be, the 1st one that writes that miracle do happen, will be bit. You have been warned.
If the person who's terminally ill gives you the permission to do so to end his/her suffering, would you do it?
zam wrote:I am amazed with others opinion on this, specially those who are against Euthenasia but pro-abortion. Shouldnt it stand on the same grounds? How can you condone this act and support the other
For instance, some cases abortion is necessary bec the life of the mother/child will be endangered if the pregnancy is push thru. But then again euthenasia would only be used for severe cases, wherein life almost does not exisit any longer.
shafique wrote:For me, the religious viewpoint is in total accordance with my logic.
Suicide is something I would not condone - and by extension I would not take another person's life either. Suicide is committed when a person is in so much anguish they do not wish to go on. Euthenasia is assisted suicide (or so those in favour of it would propose).
Another problem with Euthenasia is that in some circumstances it will be committed AGAINST the will of the suffering patient.
One should not prolong any suffering, but neither should one deliberately cause a person to die. By all means make them comfortable, but kill them as a primary objective - no.
Difficult questions definitely - but it is to answer difficult questions that we have a set of rules called religion.
Cheers,
Shafique
zam wrote:I am amazed with others opinion on this, specially those who are against Euthenasia but pro-abortion. Shouldnt it stand on the same grounds? How can you condone this act and support the other
For instance, some cases abortion is necessary bec the life of the mother/child will be endangered if the pregnancy is push thru. But then again euthenasia would only be used for severe cases, wherein life almost does not exisit any longer.
Chocoholic wrote:This is why people have living wills, to take the responsibility away from their loved ones, and to express their wishes.
Shaf, you see I have a bigger problem with your comment about turning off someone's life support, than a person who is making a conscious decision to end their life and suffering. There is not enough research done on people in comas and on life support to suggest that they may never make a recovery, unless they are clinically brain dead of course. Recently a person woke up after being in a coma for over 10 years, as their brain managed to rewire itself around the damaged areas, which caused the coma.
So many people come out of comas saying they were fully aware of everything that was happening around them, and they were screaming inside hoping someone would hear them. There are still too many unknowns with coma patients.
Chocoholic wrote:Not necessarily true however, and some people require full life support, aid with breathing etc until they're strong enough to breath once again on their own. Being on life support, does not mean a person is brain dead, only when no electrical brain activity is detected is that the case. But some people might have been in an accident and have damaged lungs, facial cavities etc which requires them to be intubated to breath using the aid of a machine, until those injuries have healed.
shafique wrote:Thanks for the clarification - my position still remains, I would take medical advice and in principle would not object to life support being stopped if there is no reasonable chance of recovery.
Let us hope this is not a decision we ever have to take.
Cheers,
Shafique
shafique wrote:Thanks for the clarification - my position still remains, I would take medical advice and in principle would not object to life support being stopped if there is no reasonable chance of recovery.
Let us hope this is not a decision we ever have to take.
Cheers,
Shafique
shafique wrote:For me, the religious viewpoint is in total accordance with my logic.
valkyrie wrote:Do you believe that the Koran is the "word of God"?
valkyrie wrote:What is your position on the politicaly controversial statements of your "holy text"?
Do you feel that homos.e.xuality is "sickening", or in the words of "Allah", "abomination"?
Do you think that women are "weaker" and "more easily fooled"?
Do you think that stoning is a just punnishment for "lewd thoughts"?
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/int/long.html