Human euthasia

[HillGoose]

I'm extremely anti-euthanasia, I'm surprised that more people don't see the slippery slope to eugenics.

If it is legalized, I would prefer every euthanization needs to be approved by written consent of the patient, a lawyer, a minimum of 3 doctors, and a judge.

If you're curious as to why human euthanasia is wrong emotionally, physically, mentally, spiritually, and the effect on those left behind, read the works of the Swiss psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross.

[Kamala]

Actually, euthanasia should only require the consent of one person. Guess who!

[America Needs R'hllor]

Actually, euthanasia should only require the consent of one person. Guess who!

*Piously points at the sky*

[HillGoose]

Actually, euthanasia should only require the consent of one person. Guess who!

Well yeah I see what you mean if you have a glock and want to do it yourself. Don't enforce it on society though.

[Kamala]

Actually, euthanasia should only require the consent of one person. Guess who!

Well yeah I see what you mean if you have a glock and want to do it yourself. Don't enforce it on society though.

Euthanasia=\= suicide. Euthanasia is almost exclusively used in discussions of the “right to die” of terminally ill patients who are in severe pain.

It’s kinda really stupid and heartless to say “don’t enforce it on society” when no one forces anything on anyone. It’s absolutely legal to walk around in a miniskirt all day but for some reason the government isn’t doing its job and forcing every man, woman, and child to wear one.

[DavidB.]

Yeah, terminally ill persons who are clearly at the end of their lives should be able to receive assistance in dying painlessly if they wish so, without suffering any longer.

No, people do not have a right to receive assistance in killing themselves if they are not physically ill but "simply" do not want to live anymore. Instead, society should help them in making them love their lives again, and the government should fund efforts to so.

Voted yes, but in the Netherlands we should not go any further than we already do.

[fhtagn]

Yeah, terminally ill persons who are clearly at the end of their lives should be able to receive assistance in dying painlessly if they wish so, without suffering any longer.

[Sirius_]

Euthanasia should require the consent of the patient while sober and capable of rational thought. Without meeting that requirement euthanasia should be considered murder.

[Dr. MB]

Euthanasia should require the consent of the patient while sober and capable of rational thought. Without meeting that requirement euthanasia should be considered murder.

Also, only if they have a terminal illness. I don't think it should be allowed for just any reason.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Euthanasia should require the consent of the patient while sober and capable of rational thought. Without meeting that requirement euthanasia should be considered murder.

Also, only if they have a terminal illness. I don't think it should be allowed for just any reason.

[HisGrace]

The thread title sounds like a gothic rock band from the 80's.

[HillGoose]

The thread title sounds like a gothic rock band from the 80's.

Lol yeah I messed it up D:

[lekmanin]

Funny how you want to start loads of wars but you have a massive moral objection to people who want to die dieing.

[Torie]

When I was in law school, I read this article by a criminal law professor at the law school, and it had an impact on me, and still does. I tend to prefer the messier approach. It does not matter what the law is. If I want to off myself, I will. And I will try to avoid being in situations where I lose that power. The issue is the risk that the right to die, morphs into the duty to die. I find that troubling.

In the real world, what often happens at the end of life is to administer an overdose of morphine. My Dad killed his mother that way, and I saw to it, that that is what happened to my Dad. My grandfather was an MD, so he killed himself with an overdose by his own hand.

I did not vote in the poll. It is too complicated to give a yes or no answer.

[Storebought]

I thought making a more developed post on this topic in the Religion/Morality thread, but haven't got around to it.

In short, yes, of course, human beings have the right to terminate their own lives, and for any reason. If medically assisted termination (I prefer that term to the word "euthenasia") were a true option, I suspect that most people will chose to end their lives that way over than by so-called natural death -- death by disease, accident, negligence, or murder. Medically assisted termination would abolish the clumsiness and lack of privacy associated with suicide.

I've been told that I overuse analogies, but one is apt: in developed countries, women overwhelmingly choose medically assisted childbirth, with epidurals and even C-sections, over natural childbirth. We need the same option at the end of life.

[Santander]

The government has no right to decide who has a "right to die" and who doesn't. Your physical health should never determine what rights you have. Either everyone is allowed to end their life, or no one is.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

The government has no right to decide who has a "right to die" and who doesn't. Your physical health should never determine what rights you have. Either everyone is allowed to end their life, or no one is.

I totally agree with you on this. this is also one of the main reasons I'm against the death penalty.

[Santander]

The government has no right to decide who has a "right to die" and who doesn't. Your physical health should never determine what rights you have. Either everyone is allowed to end their life, or no one is.

I totally agree with you on this. this is also one of the main reasons I'm against the death penalty.

I made no commentary on the death penalty. The death penalty has nothing to do with one's physical health.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Yeah, terminally ill persons who are clearly at the end of their lives should be able to receive assistance in dying painlessly if they wish so, without suffering any longer.

[GoTfan]

I saw my grandpa suffer at the end of his life from cancer when he was beyond hope of saving. I saw him wither away right before my eyes. When it eventually happened, he was basically a husk.

So yeah, if a person is sound of mind and suffering from an incurable illness, I see no reason why they shouldn't have the choice.

Also as mentioned above, do not equate suicide with euthanasia. That's a harmful argument.

[Strudelcutie4427]

No. Read The Giver for more information

[Person Man]

The government has no right to decide who has a "right to die" and who doesn't. Your physical health should never determine what rights you have. Either everyone is allowed to end their life, or no one is.

[Sirius_]

No. Read The Giver for more information

The examples in The Giver were not consensual euthanasia. Of course that should be illegal, but it doesn't provide an argument against consensual euthanasia.

[HillGoose]

No. Read The Giver for more information

The examples in The Giver were not consensual euthanasia. Of course that should be illegal, but it doesn't provide an argument against consensual euthanasia.

the thing in my mind is that consensual euthanasia will eventually evolve into forced euthanasia.

[The Govanah Jake]

Yes. In cases of terminal death or a very likely death and the patient wants too save from much suffering, if they can make a rational consent to such actions, then what gives government officials the right to allow for them to suffer more until the last minute they die. However it should be heavily regulated and heavily restricted to only such cases (as most people who support Human euthanasia would agree too i suppose).