I know it is GOD"s choice on if someone lives or not....
We are all put on earth for a reason. Some are even put here to teach others how to care and LOVE for others .
I know what I'm talking about because I have been prononced deceased.
THE DOCTORS SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO PLAY GOD.
We need to care for others and protect them even when it is very hard to do.
Fran - 12 years ago
This concept may seem so foreign to those who would never make this decision themselves but in the end no one is asking you to choose this for yourself.
I have worked for clients and elderly individuals who are not physically and or mentally able to care for themselves. To have the real discussion with someone and understand the pain that they live with every day or in the case of a new born who may live with but will have an experience of being burdened with pain emotional and physical that is unlike any other and if they had the option was available the may choose to end it themselves.
There needs to be a defined process where strict sanctions are in place to which ‘a council’ would approve or deny each and every person that chooses this option will have to present their situation to the a committee and all those that attempt to operate outside of those set criteria to be persecuted to the full extent of the law.
The doctors are not “killing” the client they are simply the tool in which to do so without physical pain and should be absent of malice. When those doctors in the Netherlands chose to end a person’s life without consent they acted in malice even if it was unintentional because they caused undue suffering to a family & friends that were not given proper information in order to make their last goodbyes.
The Netherlands may not have it right just yet but with the right people that take the time to restructure the process it can be a positive medical procedure. In order for this to become a government approved medical procedure in north america it requires a great deal of refining and consideration for each and every individual that chooses it.
Nigel Powell - 12 years ago
Murder by any other name is still murder. I don't want any person to decide when I should die. That should only be God's decision, by whatever name you may call your God !
Tony Pelletier - 12 years ago
I truly symphatize with those of you who watched a relative or a friend die slowly and in pain.
However, it would like to point out a few misunderstandings in this debate.
1) Euthanasia is neither ''letting go when the time has come'', nor ''refusing extraordinary treatments''. Euthanasia is provoking someone's death, i.e. killing that person. Natural death is like someone falling off a cliff. Euthanasia is pushing that person off the cliff.
2) It is correct to get rid of the pain. It is not correct to get rid of the person.
3) I have no problem about a farmer killing his sick cow. But human beings are not cattle.
4) Life is hard. Death won't be easy. Wanting to die (or to live, for that matter) ''painlessly'' is an illusion. Our automaticly-opening-garage-door comfy society has forgotten the way to deal with suffering. Our grandparents toiled everyday just to barely eat decently. I'll bet that the people in Ethiopia aren't even thinking about euthanasia. And the people in Haiti still danced and sang after the great earthquake.
4) There is a double standard in our society: we spend much (but still not enough) to prevent teen suicide, but yet, some want to help old people kill themselves. What's next: pro-suicide school clubs?
5) Everyone has the ''right'' to die, so to speak (because pretty much everyone will die one day). Euthanasia advocates want the right to *kill*. Nuance.
6) It is not a solely religious issue (although Christianity brings a lot of meaning and light to even the darkest circumstances). Even atheists can understand that killing a human is not right, even if that person is suffering. Like said earlier by someone else, the end does not justify the means.
7) Often, the ''right to die'' (or rather, the ''right to be killed'') advocates talk of compassion. Nothing could be further from the truth, because compassion means ''to suffer with'' (from the Latin, cum passio). By getting rid of the pain through euthanasia, we get rid of the person. In the end, there is no one to ''suffer with'' anymore.
8) There is also a risk that the relative acting ''with compassion'' would be acting selfishly, tired of staying at the sick person's bedside.
9) Elder abuse is also pretty much a risk. It is already a problem in Canada ( the Canadian government has started to work more intensely to reduce the problem). Euthanasia-permitting laws would go against the efforts to protect the abused elders.
10) The ''right to be killed'' advocates also talk of dignity. Tell me, what is the most dignified: to live serenely and painfully until the (real) end, or asking a doctor to murder us?
11) If doctor-assisted suicide were permitted by a federal law, the physician/patient relation would be weakened. People would start asking '' This doctor, is he gonna help me to heal, or is he supposed to reduce the health care costs?''.
12) Some would say that it is a personnal choice and that other people need not interfere. Well, we prohibit smoking in public places because we acknowledge that someone's choice interfere with the health of others. The same goes for euthanasia or assisted suicide. Personnal choices have social consequences. A research (may 2010) reported that in the Flanders region (in Belgium), even with ''protection'' clauses in the law (two doctors, consent), 32% (almost a third!) of people were euthanized *without* their consent. It's a slippery slope. By permitting euthanasia in Canada, the *personnal* choices of some will likely turn into the killing without their consent of others. The handicapped and aged people who live in a society that permits and encourage the killing of others and where human lives are disposable and without special value, will soon or later suffer the consequences of other people's personnal choices.
Lawrie Sutton - 12 years ago
I believe the people that think of assisted suicide as wrong must be brainwashed. People in other cultures do this all the time. As long as there are safeguards in place to ensure that it is the individual's wishes; and not just one doctor or relative; then I think it is a more dignified way to end one's life. I have experienced several friends and relatives who have had to endure months and sometimes years of pain, knowing full well that death was inevitable, would have loved to have the opportunity to get their affairs in order and then leave this world on their own terms. To prolong life, at all costs, shows no compassion for the individual and the pain they are experiencing. If an animal was in distress, we think nothing of ending their agony; so why don't we think the same for the people we love?
Jim - 12 years ago
I truly sympathize with those that have watched their loved ones die in pain. It must be very painful to watch. However this is, like it or not, a moral question. You either believe in God or you don't. God determines when one passes into the next life. It is never easy to watch a loved one die, let alone one that is suffering. The mother of Christ must have endured a great agony when her son was crucified and died on the cross in excruciating pain. You either believe or not. This does not help the non-believer to understand the suffering but it would if they understood that after the suffering comes absolutely eternal joy. Forever.
The wrong thing done for the right reasons is still the wrong thing. The end never justifies the means.
Tracey - 12 years ago
I watched my father-in-law and mother-in-law both die slow, painful, prolonged by drugs and not knowing what day it was or who was visiting them, deaths and it was terrible for them. They both signed DNR's, but they just kept pumping in the morphine. We watched for months as they deteriorated, always asking to "up the morphine" knowing that would kill them. I wish we had been able to do that for them. Instead they died in pain, in a very undignified manner (i.e. diapers, drooling, not seeing, not feeling). So Lawyer Lady - how do you think that's a civilized way to die. You people make me sick with your crap. The right to do is everybody's right - how dare you take it away?
John Goes - 12 years ago
I would wonder what these people would be thinking if they were left to die in extreme pain for months on end. begging to stop the pain when drugs no longer work. No one wants to die but when death is inevitable and the pain is unbearable how many of us have the strength to bear it and what kind of person does it take to sit back and watch a loved one suffer so?
I know it is GOD"s choice on if someone lives or not....
We are all put on earth for a reason. Some are even put here to teach others how to care and LOVE for others .
I know what I'm talking about because I have been prononced deceased.
THE DOCTORS SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO PLAY GOD.
We need to care for others and protect them even when it is very hard to do.
This concept may seem so foreign to those who would never make this decision themselves but in the end no one is asking you to choose this for yourself.
I have worked for clients and elderly individuals who are not physically and or mentally able to care for themselves. To have the real discussion with someone and understand the pain that they live with every day or in the case of a new born who may live with but will have an experience of being burdened with pain emotional and physical that is unlike any other and if they had the option was available the may choose to end it themselves.
There needs to be a defined process where strict sanctions are in place to which ‘a council’ would approve or deny each and every person that chooses this option will have to present their situation to the a committee and all those that attempt to operate outside of those set criteria to be persecuted to the full extent of the law.
The doctors are not “killing” the client they are simply the tool in which to do so without physical pain and should be absent of malice. When those doctors in the Netherlands chose to end a person’s life without consent they acted in malice even if it was unintentional because they caused undue suffering to a family & friends that were not given proper information in order to make their last goodbyes.
The Netherlands may not have it right just yet but with the right people that take the time to restructure the process it can be a positive medical procedure. In order for this to become a government approved medical procedure in north america it requires a great deal of refining and consideration for each and every individual that chooses it.
Murder by any other name is still murder. I don't want any person to decide when I should die. That should only be God's decision, by whatever name you may call your God !
I truly symphatize with those of you who watched a relative or a friend die slowly and in pain.
However, it would like to point out a few misunderstandings in this debate.
1) Euthanasia is neither ''letting go when the time has come'', nor ''refusing extraordinary treatments''. Euthanasia is provoking someone's death, i.e. killing that person. Natural death is like someone falling off a cliff. Euthanasia is pushing that person off the cliff.
2) It is correct to get rid of the pain. It is not correct to get rid of the person.
3) I have no problem about a farmer killing his sick cow. But human beings are not cattle.
4) Life is hard. Death won't be easy. Wanting to die (or to live, for that matter) ''painlessly'' is an illusion. Our automaticly-opening-garage-door comfy society has forgotten the way to deal with suffering. Our grandparents toiled everyday just to barely eat decently. I'll bet that the people in Ethiopia aren't even thinking about euthanasia. And the people in Haiti still danced and sang after the great earthquake.
4) There is a double standard in our society: we spend much (but still not enough) to prevent teen suicide, but yet, some want to help old people kill themselves. What's next: pro-suicide school clubs?
5) Everyone has the ''right'' to die, so to speak (because pretty much everyone will die one day). Euthanasia advocates want the right to *kill*. Nuance.
6) It is not a solely religious issue (although Christianity brings a lot of meaning and light to even the darkest circumstances). Even atheists can understand that killing a human is not right, even if that person is suffering. Like said earlier by someone else, the end does not justify the means.
7) Often, the ''right to die'' (or rather, the ''right to be killed'') advocates talk of compassion. Nothing could be further from the truth, because compassion means ''to suffer with'' (from the Latin, cum passio). By getting rid of the pain through euthanasia, we get rid of the person. In the end, there is no one to ''suffer with'' anymore.
8) There is also a risk that the relative acting ''with compassion'' would be acting selfishly, tired of staying at the sick person's bedside.
9) Elder abuse is also pretty much a risk. It is already a problem in Canada ( the Canadian government has started to work more intensely to reduce the problem). Euthanasia-permitting laws would go against the efforts to protect the abused elders.
10) The ''right to be killed'' advocates also talk of dignity. Tell me, what is the most dignified: to live serenely and painfully until the (real) end, or asking a doctor to murder us?
11) If doctor-assisted suicide were permitted by a federal law, the physician/patient relation would be weakened. People would start asking '' This doctor, is he gonna help me to heal, or is he supposed to reduce the health care costs?''.
12) Some would say that it is a personnal choice and that other people need not interfere. Well, we prohibit smoking in public places because we acknowledge that someone's choice interfere with the health of others. The same goes for euthanasia or assisted suicide. Personnal choices have social consequences. A research (may 2010) reported that in the Flanders region (in Belgium), even with ''protection'' clauses in the law (two doctors, consent), 32% (almost a third!) of people were euthanized *without* their consent. It's a slippery slope. By permitting euthanasia in Canada, the *personnal* choices of some will likely turn into the killing without their consent of others. The handicapped and aged people who live in a society that permits and encourage the killing of others and where human lives are disposable and without special value, will soon or later suffer the consequences of other people's personnal choices.
I believe the people that think of assisted suicide as wrong must be brainwashed. People in other cultures do this all the time. As long as there are safeguards in place to ensure that it is the individual's wishes; and not just one doctor or relative; then I think it is a more dignified way to end one's life. I have experienced several friends and relatives who have had to endure months and sometimes years of pain, knowing full well that death was inevitable, would have loved to have the opportunity to get their affairs in order and then leave this world on their own terms. To prolong life, at all costs, shows no compassion for the individual and the pain they are experiencing. If an animal was in distress, we think nothing of ending their agony; so why don't we think the same for the people we love?
I truly sympathize with those that have watched their loved ones die in pain. It must be very painful to watch. However this is, like it or not, a moral question. You either believe in God or you don't. God determines when one passes into the next life. It is never easy to watch a loved one die, let alone one that is suffering. The mother of Christ must have endured a great agony when her son was crucified and died on the cross in excruciating pain. You either believe or not. This does not help the non-believer to understand the suffering but it would if they understood that after the suffering comes absolutely eternal joy. Forever.
The wrong thing done for the right reasons is still the wrong thing. The end never justifies the means.
I watched my father-in-law and mother-in-law both die slow, painful, prolonged by drugs and not knowing what day it was or who was visiting them, deaths and it was terrible for them. They both signed DNR's, but they just kept pumping in the morphine. We watched for months as they deteriorated, always asking to "up the morphine" knowing that would kill them. I wish we had been able to do that for them. Instead they died in pain, in a very undignified manner (i.e. diapers, drooling, not seeing, not feeling). So Lawyer Lady - how do you think that's a civilized way to die. You people make me sick with your crap. The right to do is everybody's right - how dare you take it away?
I would wonder what these people would be thinking if they were left to die in extreme pain for months on end. begging to stop the pain when drugs no longer work. No one wants to die but when death is inevitable and the pain is unbearable how many of us have the strength to bear it and what kind of person does it take to sit back and watch a loved one suffer so?