Originally Posted by Boredpayne

onomatopoeia



This is specifically about terminally ill patients opting to die, as specified in the quote and original post.

Originally Posted by Gorman

Living implies dieing.

This is unavoidable.

Originally Posted by AikidoKP

True, but as mentioned before, being terminally ill isn't. Changing variables doesn't help the discussion.
Sure, a perfectly healthy person who stubbed their toe is fine. Someone who's coughing up blood with two weeks to live isn't. Is it ok to kill one but not the other? I'd say that pretty much sums up what's being asked.

Originally Posted by Rutten

But seriously bru, I don't think anyone would have a problem (morally) with letting a terminally ill dude that's in heaps o' pain choose to end his life. Objections?

So the only issue that remains is whether that ill guy can give the doctor guy permission to kill him. Thoughts?

Originally Posted by Logic

Easier said than done. Most people in this situation would probably want the doctors to do everything possible, even if they "know" in an intellectual sense that there may be .001% chance of recovery. People often report being 100% confident that they will be the 1 in 1000 that recovers. Futility is much more difficult to assess from within these situations than from the outside.

Originally Posted by Gorman

Like I said, each case needs to be judged individually, would you let a guy with 15 days left to live kill himself? Seems a bit arbitrary.

Originally Posted by AikidoKP

Not really. I've had to make this choice before, and while it took a bit longer than choosing between a cheeseburger or lasagna, it didn't take long to decide, quite a simple decision, for me at least.

Originally Posted by Gorman

> enough pain to hold them in bed/one place AND terminally ill
So those are your conditions for allowing euthanasia?


What if he had 40 years left?
Would you stop him? Or would you let him do what he wants?

What if he wanted to kill you instead of himself?
Would you stop him? Or would you let him do what he wants?

Originally Posted by Logic

Your personal experience is interesting but does not address my claim, which was about "most people." And the fact that you compare deciding to participate in the death of a loved one with choosing between a cheeseburger or lasagna makes me suspicious about whether you have really been in this situation.

Another part of this story is that people in chronic pain often have reduced decision-making capacity, so often their health care decisions go to a proxy. This often means that a family member will be the one deciding the fate of the patient. I just think that most people do not have the courage to participate in assisted suicide. In fact, we see a parallel situation all the time - decisions about removing life support. So many people stay on life support for far too long because their family members are unable to let them go.

Originally Posted by Acavado

Would you rather die or be a vegetable?

Originally Posted by Gorman

would you let a guy with 15 days left to live kill himself?

Originally Posted by AikidoKP

Yes. Any one who has been diagnosed with a terminal condition and is in enough pain to hold them in bed or in one place should have the option of assisted suicide. Whether it's 2 days or 2 years, as long as the conditions are met it should be an option.

Originally Posted by Rutten

Would you stop him? Or would you let him do what he wants?