Assisted suicide?

[Silverhair]

This is NOT part of my series of posts on medical care, although it is related to it, and certainly grew out of it. If have alway been opposed to doctor assisted suicide because I have felt that you didn't need a doctor to end your life. Yet, is that always the case?

I remember, about 25 years ago, when my then-wife's grandfather (A really great guy.) was dying of prostrate cancer. He was bedridden at home. He begged me to load the shotgun and leave it within his reach. Of course I didn't. He suffered for four years before he died.

Our society has as an ethic that you are supposed to live at any cost as long as you can. That is natural, considering the act of self preservation is an instinct that even insects have. But some societies, I have heard, have an additional ethic of dying honorably.

When a person, tortured by a painful disease, is ready to be freed; wouldn't it be better to make available to them such a release? Even have a proper ceromony for it?

I AM NOT ADVOCATING KILLING THEM. Don't distort my question.
I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT COST. That is a different thread. Don't distort my question.

[Mistress Quickly]

1. Animal owners can

put their pets out of their misery and suffering, but lets watch your mother, already bedridden with a stroke and cannot converse at all, just stare at the ceiling or blankly at you, slowly wither away with lung cancer.

Can't they just up the morphine until "sleep" comes?

[TeeYiYi]

3. Yes they can . . .

. . . and do. But be careful what you wish for. I watched someone very dear to me die of an assisted morphine death and it has left me scarred ever since. I carry great guilt for watching her gasp for breath in panic. Looking at me like I had something to do with it. I didn't. But I wish I had stopped it. It was a horrible thing to watch. They fed her her last meal and then stopped all food and water. Then IV morphine. That's all I can share for now.

TYY

[JHB]

2. A connected question...

...if the door is opened for this, how much room is there for abuse by unscrupulous relatives, confidants, and doctors after inheritances or with some other motive?

[BeFree]

5. Abuse is a court matter

The question is: Should we have a way for folks who KNOW that their life is not worth living any longer, be given the right, from the state, to put an end to their personal suffering?

Those that have taken their right to die out of the hands of the state and placed it in their own hands, usually do so in a messy way, leaving someone else to clean up after them and burdening others with unanswerable questions.

There need be a lawful way for folks to make the decision so that the aftermath is honorable and respected.

Courts can hash it all out ahead of time. But we need the state to make it possible first by passing a law giving us the "Right".

[DemExpat]

4. I live in a country with this policy....

which seems to work OK for many people.
Doctors do not rush in and perform the service at the first request - it takes time, talk, and second or third opinions from other doctors before euthanasia is performed.

I watched my huband's grandmother receive her extra dose of morphine to help her over.....it was hard, but also merciful IMO.

BUT, after being with my father in Houston with excellent Hospice care where they kept him absloutely comfortable until the end, I tend to favor this approach instead of euthanasia.
He had money to pay for nursing and daughters to come care for him on his deathbed.....what to do with those who do not have these "resources"???

edit:
One important point - my father was not asking for euthanasia.

But the danger, I think, in offering this to people who want it, especially the aged, is that perhaps some will feel obliged to step out to avoid being a burden to their kids, or society....Here lies the biggest danger IMO.

DemEx

[Silverhair]

7. Yes, there are indeed great dangers in what I ask.

That's why I threw it out as I did, as a question with no proposal of my own. I honestly don't really know where I would stand on some of the issues involved.

[DemExpat]

11. I guess that freedom of choice always involves

risk and danger....

I also have no clear idea about euthanasia being "right or wrong", but I also appreicate living in a country that openly discusses this, and has taken steps to try to incorporate this for people who actively want the option.

DemEx

[Sapphocrat]

8. I applaud the process in the Netherlands...

...and I believe it works much the same in the UK (Brits, correct me if I'm wrong).

As for me, my stance on assisted suicide is the same as on abortion: I couldn't do it, and I couldn't help anyone else check out (although I would "assist" passively, if that makes sense). But I support the right to do either; any question of morality is between the person and his or her god, if any.

That's not ducking the issue; that's really how I feel: I've made the decision for myself, but I have no right to make that judgment for anyone else.

[DemExpat]

10. I also don't know if I would use this service.....

but it certainly feels "liberating" to have the option.....just as with abortion.

DemEx

[Sapphocrat]

14. Exactly n/t

[arcos]

39. I can't understand why euthanasia is more controversial than abortion...

to the point that even though a lot of countries allow abortion, very few allow euthanasia.

I agree with you... the option should be there.

[Bridget Burke]

13. Excellent Hospice care is really expensive

If it was available to everybody who needed it, fewer would ask for euthanasia.

There would still be cases where a quicker exit might be desired, but first let's ensure that the very best care is really offered to all.

[Lars39]

16. I've been one of the daughters.

There were no resources for private care, and at first hospice help only came to the house about every other day. My 75 yo father was trying to do round the clock care until I realized what the situation was.
Well before my mother went into an oxycontin-induced coma it was taking 3 people to manage her and to round up food and clean laundry. After about 2 weeks, everyone was exhausted physically and mentally, but it wasn't over.

The ideal would have been to have 24 hour private nurses or enough hospice nurses, but it was not to be. There were only enough hospice nurses to go around(county-wise) for the very end.

There's also the matter of boundaries. At what point does the family member cease to be a parent and become a patient? Example: medication given rectally. It's all well and good to say "now it's your turn to be the parent...", but if the parent has full use of her mind, it can be humiliating for both to have a grown child and not a nurse to give
medication.

There were also things that had to be done towards the very end that a family member should just not have to face. In a clinical setting the family members would have been shooed from the room, yet in the home setting, the family member is all of a sudden thrown into a scenario that would make a 3rd yr nursing student blanch.

Just 3 months later my terminally ill aunt died a needlessly cruel death because her doctor did not recommend hospice, even though she knew my aunt was terminal.

This country had the resources to treat people right and didn't. I can't imagine how it will be now that the resources are drying up. :(

[Sapphocrat]

21. Does that ever hit home, Lars...

I've been doing the sole-caregiver role for just a couple of weeks, and while it's nowhere (not even remotely) near that point, it's finally dawning on Mom that it may get to that point... eventually. (It dawned on me a long time ago.)

And if it ever does... Lars, can I tap you for some first-person support and advice?

I'm feeling pretty scared, and very (physically) alone.

[Lars39]

22. Yes. pm me as needed !

I'll help in any way I can. It's a rough road, especially trying to go it alone. {{{{Saphocrat}}}}

[Sapphocrat]

24. Thank you, Lars...

That means a lot.

[Individualist]

28. So have I

as sole caregiver for my mother who was terminally ill. Hospice was only minimally helpful.

[Lars39]

34. Yes, an hour or less every other day or so isn't enough.

So sorry about your mother. :hug: I thought at first that they didn't spend as long with us because we had medically savvy people(mom, my sister, aunt), but then I realized that they were horribly understaffed and having to drive all over several counties to boot(we're in rural TN).

It would make sense to have a hospice facility in every county. I know that there would be some that would resist the idea. The building itself could become a negative symbol of the finality of their death;there is still resistance to hospice in general.

People are suffering very painful deaths when hospice is called in too late, and the unnecessary turmoil/stress placed on families shows that something has to give.

[Kanary]

18. Why not both?

And, as you brought up, what about those of us without those resources?

I know that I don't have the grace to "live life well" under horrible conditions. I'm simply too empty.

Kanary

[SheilaT]

6. A couple of random questions here.

We don't let our animals suffer needlessly. Why is it okay for humans to do so?

If you personally are willing to linger for days, weeks, months, maybe even years in unending agony, that is your choice. However, someone else may prefer not to die that way.

So it's better for everyone to have inadequate pain relief than for one person to die a little earlier from a little too much morphine?

Why should the distant possibility that an easy death technology might be overused trump the real needs of those currently suffering?

Maybe this kind of reasoning should be applied to all technologies? (Sometimes people run others down in a car. Maybe no one should have a car. Babies drown in bathtubs. Let's eliminate bathtubs. You get the idea.)

[jsw_81]

41. It's mostly because of conservative religious beliefs

Many Americans are taught to believe that suffering is "God's will" and some even feel that it's a "blessing" from above. We treat animals differently because we're supposedly above them (but any trained biologist will tell you that that's nonsense).

I don't speak for the Dean campaign on this issue, but personally I'm all in favor of assisited suicide laws like the one they passed in Oregon. I'd like to see it made legal in all fifty states.

[ProfessorGAC]

9. Yes. I'm In Favor Of It

I see no reason to make people suffer with no hope of recovery. It seems cruel. If they wish to fight to the end, good for them. But, if they can no longer fight, i don't believe it's society's place to force them to push on with no hope of victory.
The Professor

[Kanary]

12. I'll make it personal.

This has happened to me in the last several months.

I have a very painful eye injury that will NOT heal by itself. The pain is not something that you "learn to live with". Without any treatment, all I could do was knock myself out with sleeping pills. Yes, it was that bad.

I did everything I could to find the care that I know is available, but...... It simply wasn't available to ME.

I can tell you that I very much wanted "OUT". I haven't much to look forward to, anyway, given that I'm on disability and that isn't going to get any better, and the cuts are coming anyway, and I have no family.

I can tell you that I definitely would take that option if it was available. I have often thought that it would make much more sense for me to "go" and let someone who has everything to live for have that opportunity. I would gladly trade places if I could.

Edited: to say I have no interest in hearing religious comments, or anything of the sort. If someone wants to actually hear what I'm saying, then I'll converse. Otherwise, I've heard it all.

Kanary

[Sapphocrat]

23. No judgment from this corner at all...

When I was 22, I ended up in emergency with the kind of pain (long story, the detail of which are irrelevant) that was beyond anything I could imagine the human body ever enduring.

They (stupidly) sent me home with pills that did little more than knock me out temporarily, and when I came to, all I knew was that if they couldn't fix it, immediately, I wanted out, immediately.

When my then-gf shouted through my blinding haze to ask me if I understood that I was facing the removal of Organ X through surgery, I screamed back, "I don't care if they cut off my legs! Anything to make this stop!"

So, pain, I understand. And wanting anything -- including a fast, clean exit -- to make it stop, I understand.

And no doubt you have indeed "heard it all," but I'm going to send all positive energy and wishes that the pain stops -- but that we still have you with us to tell the tale.

Sending all the good vibes I've got to send...

[Kanary]

26. You don't know how much it means to me to be heard!!

Thanks, Sapphocrat!

I'm so tired of being expected to just be strong, no matter what, and not having anyone actually take the time to hear. As I'm sure you know, when you're dealing with that much pain, sermons just don't work.

People seem to expect so much strength from those who are suffering, and yet expect them to never lash out in sheer exhaustion. Sometimes we've just used up all our inner resources, and without fresh input, it just isn't going to renew itself.

I appreciate your willingness to listen!

Kanary

[TexasMexican]

15. I support assisted suicide...

for the elderly or people who who are in great ammounts of pain with a terminal illness.

That being said I have very little sympathy for relatively normal and healthy people who commit suicide.

[Lars39]

17. The "relatively normal and healthy people" are ill, too, and

deserve our help and sympathy also.

[TexasMexican]

19. not the ones that kill themselves and/or others.

they are dead by thier own hands why do they need my sympathy.

[Lars39]

20. If they are mentally ill they are still ill and need help.

[Deja Q]

25. "Final Exit" is all I'd ever do for a person, it's a book...

I wouldn't buy or rent the materials the book mentions.

I'm amazed it hasn't been outlawed.

[Serenity-NOW]

27. Priorities are important, don't get side tracked

9/11 investigation is what I'd call a priority, energy meetings minutes area priority, AIDS is a priority.

Outing * is a definite priority but frankly assisted suicide and gay marriage?

Don't waste your time with this sideshow. This is our forum WE set the priorities and we don't need the distractions since they sap energy for actual priorities.

[Lars39]

35. I think we can multi-task; we are a higher species, right?

To those of us with terminally ill family members, it is a priority.

[Serenity-NOW]

37. That's the best thing about being a democrat!

I appreciate that we can disagree and still work together. However, while I can empathize, been there with family, I'm not entirely convinced that we are a higher species.

For what it's worth I think that if people choose for assisted suicide, abortion or whatever societally harmless personal thing they desire, that is their personal choice and is not a matter for public discourse.

The Law is irrelevant on this.

[jsw_81]

43. It is DEFINITELY a matter of public discourse

If grandpa is in horrible agony and decides to blow his brains out, there will be a huge investigation, the home will be turned into a crime scene, and the family will go through even more hell after losing a loved one. If doctor assisted suicide were legal, however, grandpa could die peacefully at a time of his own choosing. So it's definitely something we should discuss.

[Military Brat]

51. This is not a "sideshow." This is real life for many people.

And watching someone die slowly of a terminal disease will really flip your priorities around.

Have some empathy. Failing that, have some sympathy. If you can't muster that, how about some compassion?

[stevedeshazer]

29. I don't quite understand your post

You say:

"When a person, tortured by a painful disease, is ready to be freed; wouldn't it be better to make available to them such a release? Even have a proper ceromony for it?"

Of course, I agree...

You also say:

"If have alway been opposed to doctor assisted suicide because I have felt that you didn't need a doctor to end your life. Yet, is that always the case?"

You indicate you are conflicted, maybe that's the point?

In my state, we have what is mistakenly called an "assisted suicide law", but it is not that at all. It is the "Death With Dignity" Act, which provides that a terminally ill patient may be prescribed a lethal dose of medication. Any such request must be approved by at least two physicians who review the case.

Even then, once the decision has been been approved, the patient receives a prescription. That's it as far as the doctor is concerned. It is up to the patient to take the medication. In practice, this means a loved one will help said patient deliver the medication. The prescribing doctor is not liable if these conditions are met.

Voters here approved this new law TWICE, initially by a small margin. The Radical Right mounted a court challenge, and it was sent back to the voters. The second time, it was approved by an even larger margin.

Since then, aTtorney-gEneral John Ashcroft has tried to intimidate doctors using federal statutes involving the controlled substances laws, in effect threatening physicians in our state with federal prosecution despite state law.

In summation, the law works fine without federal interference, and the name "Death With Dignity" is appropriate. It's administered by the patient or with help from a loved one, at least two physicians must agree on the prognosis, and it is up to the patient to carry it out alone or with help. I want that option, make no mistake. It's my life, and I'll do what I want.

[Silverhair]

30. Yes, I am conflicted. My position is changing and I have to rethink it.

That rethinking has been caused by some of the post in my other thread on health care.

[stevedeshazer]

32. Glad to help

Or maybe I made it worse! :-)

[Kanary]

33. I applaud you for that.

Rethinking can be uncomfortable, but certainly better than rigidity. :)

I appreciate your honesty.

Kanary

[alwynsw]

31. Assisted suicide should be an option

Barring that, I can use my "just in case" .45 on myself if necessary.

[Cleita]

36. Yes, this happened to my father

who suffered from heart problems among other diseases. At that time the medicos went to extremes to keep him alive after a near fatal heart attack. He was black and blue and sustained a broken rib from having his chest pounded to bring him back. My mother and I begged them to make him comfortable so he could pass in peace, but they had to keep him alive at all costs. He finally did die and they couldn't bring him back.

Nowadays, I am happy that there is hospice care. Here they give you drugs to kill the pain, withdraw food and let you die peacefully when there is no hope of recovery. It's a sort of mercy killing, but it is also a natural way to die and was how people passed away before we had all this technology to prolong life when it's no longer feasible to do so.

[Devlzown]

38. Hospice helped with my grandfather last year.

He was staying next door at my mom's house while he was dying. It was getting to where every breath he took was painful for him. Hospice brought some morphine to give to him. The morphine slowed his breathing until he just stopped. He might have lasted a few more days if we hadn't given him the morphine, but those days would probably have seemed like torture to him, considering how much pain he was in. As it turned out, he died quietly in his daughter's house, surrounded by family. Not a bad way to go.

[Jose Diablo]

40. Its one thing to refuse health care

Another to induce death. I do not feel I have the right to take my own life. I can refuse care, but suicide, nope. My life is not mine to take. I have to ride it all the way to the end.

As for assisting another? Again, its not mine to give or take away. I do understand what others mean though. I cannot judge others on this.

The last 5 years of my fathers life was hell on earth for him. 4-5 heart attacks, paralyzed from waist down, blind in one eye, couldn't breath very well. One drug for one thing then 3 more to counteract the side effects of the first drug. It was like 20 drugs in all.

I remember getting a call at 2 in the morning, my father fell out of bed and my mother couldn't lift him into the wheelchair. The humility in his eyes when I got there was almost unbearable.

He said he had enough. He refused to take his medication. I am not sure how it worked, but he was given a "twilight" drug that made him sleep a lot. Hospice would come twice a day to take his vitals.

The last time I saw him, he woke-up and told me goodbye. Then he was gone.

It is far better to die at home though. I would rather die at home than a hospital or some shitty smelling nursing home.

I wish I could say something smart about death. I hear people give eulogies that sound so profound. But to me, I cannot find anything good to say about it. One thing though, none of us gets out of here alive.

[jsw_81]

44. Fine if you feel that way

But don't try to impose your beliefs on the rest of society.

[Jose Diablo]

45. What do you mean?

What beliefs should I not try to impose on the rest of society? And how would I impose these beliefs on others?

By speaking what I thought? Is this your objection?

[Silverhair]

47. I respect your feelings.

We may be disagreeing strongly in the other thread, but I certainly understand and respect your feelings in the above post. I won't know how I feel about suicide until I am in that position.

[Dirk39]

42. Hello from Germany,

if you ask me as a human being, I would immediately say: Yes.
If a friend or a relative of mine would ask me, to support him or her - and I would be convinced, that there is no other solution - I would do it, even if it is against the law.
But now, we're talking politics:

Let's suppose it's allowed, it's legal and it's common:
for someone, who's old or sick or both, but who wants to live, it would mean pressure. It would be like: Hey, look at all these reasonable people, who don't want to be a burden for society or their family. And now you 80 years old sick human being will spent ten thousands of dollars or euros or even more money, for maybe just a few more month in pain? Are you that selfish? HEy common, let's have a little ceremony for you?
That's the problem, I see. And sorry, if I relate this post of you to one, you've made before: but wasn't that other post of you exactly about old people during their last years being too expensive?
And didn't you want to find reasons to defend healthcare, that are not only based on compassion?
I tell you one thing: there isn't a solution like this. As soon as you even marginally make this an economic question, the only answer is euthanasy. The only answer, capitalism has, is: kill them or let them die, if they are no longer profitable. If they have made lots of money before and can spent it for healthcare. Let them survive, even if it doesn't make sense. Only human values can be the foundation for universal healthcare.
I don't want to offend you, and I really don't question your intentions, but this is what I think.
Hi,
Dirk

[Silverhair]

49. No, like most people, you distorted my position.,

I was making the distinction between futile care and comfort care. Futile care can occur at any age, but is most common with older people. I would appreciate it if you would debate with me on what my actual position is, not on your misunderstanding of it.

The concept of futile care should not be that difficult to understand.

No society, whether capitalist, socialist, communist, or whatever, has infinite resources. That is a brutal fact of life that you will just have to accept. That means that hard choices in allocations of resources have to be made. Or do you deny that?

[Jose Diablo]

50. Again we disagree

Silverhair said,

"No society, whether capitalist, socialist, communist, or whatever, has infinite resources. That is a brutal fact of life that you will just have to accept. That means that hard choices in allocations of resources have to be made. Or do you deny that?"

It does not require infinite resources. It only requires supply to be higher than demand.

We use "allocation" now. We call it money and people recieve money in proportion based on their market position, not based on value and certainly not based on need.

This "allocation" is done by forcing the vast majority of people to work at far a lower value recieved than what they contribute. How else could the wealthy be getting far wealthier. With the help of our very own government, I might add.

Now to say, your life is futile, the thing you should do now is die, because you have no future is well, I don't know how to say this nicely, but it sounds like something a cheap labor conservative would say.

[gate of the sun]

46. people's wishes

should be granted. People shouldn't have to suffer. Why do people think it is OK to put down a dog but we must let people suffer and die a long slow painful death even if they don't want to?

[arewethereyet]

48. it is possible to will yourself dead

think not ?

Then explain why so many elderly spouses die very shortly after their mates pass away.

Having witnessed my father-in-law's passing where I saw in his face that he allowed himself to end. It was coming soon but he clearly let it happen as his family assured him that it was OK for him to do so.

That others don't is a matter of fear of the unknown (there is a reason people get religous at the end) and a lack of desire to actually die.

You don't need to kill them, just let them know that its ok for them to do it themselves.

Euthanasia is fine on animals that can't reason and I suppose for those humans who have lost that capability as well. But not if the mind is still functioning.

[LWolf]

52. Yes.

There are gray areas here...room for dangerous manipulation of the issue. But I feel so strongly about this one.

My life is MINE. It's no one else's. If my body is in such condition that I will never heal, never be out of pain, and face lying in bed unable to care for myself or find relief from suffering, I'll decide when and how to check out. I reserve the right to make that decision myself. When I am ready to be free, help me, or get out of the way.