i think it will depend on the case..because sometimes the patient's family don't have choice..imagine that u are the patient and u are in dead brain or a vegetables and u can't speak and can't express what u really want ? do u think that u still want to live in this world and know that u will be always a "weight" for the ret of your family? ..and if you are one of the member of the family of the patient.. can u stand there and look at that person suffer in front of u ?( it can be your brother, ur dad, mum ..)..this is true that person is not dead yet..but some medical case u have no choice..and then u have to take a decison that seem the most reasonnable( no matter how hard it can be)... Like i say euthanasia is a choice to an certain extend....
I wonder what that perception of suffering come from... that brain dead/vegetable on machine suffering? Not feeling is not feeling, the only suffering is on the ones left alive and seeing it, not necessary in the patient. Of course I know it is a tough choice, yet legally if the person left a living will on himself NOT to be unplugged, no amount of familial proxy can overrule it... Legality rules in my book.
My mentor had told me when he gets old and sick, he wants his life to be terminated instead of wasting his children's time, money & emotions. I totally agree with that because I dont wanna make my loved ones suffer...
it's hard deciding between yourself or your family, in the sense that you might end up homeless or something if you choose to support the machines. and fyi: i just added the "from a spiritual perspective" because this is the philosophy & religion forum.. anyways, i don't know what i would choose if i was the terminally ill patient.. would saying yes to euthanasia be suicide for me? i don't know, and i hope i never get to make that choice. and i don't think there's full coverage of any kind in the States? what matters is the money you can offer.
i think its just crual.... if theres no hope of a recovery.... y keep the person alive and make them suffer even more...... put the person out
If only everyone can die "naturally" -- euthanasia wouldn't have to be implemented. And what's wrong with "prolonging" life by a machine? If the machine can keep a person alive and doing normal everyday activities, why not? Unless we're talking about a machine keeping a vegetable-human alive, I don't see anything wrong.
nothing is wrong with that..but u know if u try to put urself at the place of the patient's family..will u accept to see the patient keep living like that? when it will be (maybe) better to let the patient go?..
Why would anyone not be able to die naturally? Its not like they can't, but more like they are not allowed to. And nth is 'wrong' with living off a machine if you even consider it living. Btw, how can a person who can continue staying 'alive and doing normal everyday activities' even be considered under euthanasia?
In my dictionary, "naturally" means dying without pain or agony such as death in his/her sleep. I would not define dying "naturally" as in the patient suffocates from the millions of diseases out there. Seriously, would you consider it "a natural death" if you had throat cancer and the last moments of your life included excruciating pain in the throat and the inability to breath to the point where your eyes bulge out? No. I responded to your vague "prolonged by a machine" phrase assuming you meant the normal elderly population who depend on machines to perform everyday tasks. I seriously have no idea what you meant by "dying naturally rather than prolonging life by a machine" in terms of euthanasia. Do you mean that euthanasia, in your perspective, consists of a patient laying on a hospital bed for weeks on end, living off of a machine, waiting for the signal to manually die?
Because technically the person is still living but IMO it's quite inhumane to have someone sustained on machines for long periods of time. Pulling the plug of the machine can be either murder or euthanasia depending on your take on it...
No Lily, I've seen someone close to me suffer so much in a terminal phase breast cancer that at the end of the day you just pray when god would take her to relieve such misery and she thought the same too. It was like a battle you try to fight but know you couldn't win. Was very traumatic for everyone close to her.
i'm sorry for that person..but before i "worked" in a cancer service and then i see a lot of person who were in phase terminal..i know how hard it can be for the patient and the family also .. but then the first pain that make the patient suffer wasn't the physically one but it's was more mentally...now the medicine can relieve all the pain...most of the people can make the difference between the pain that come from a feeling like when u know that u will lost soon someone u love and the one that is just "pity"..and i'm sure that if the doctor use the euthanasia in that case it will be the family's patient who will suffer the more because they will see someone who they love leave fast this world...and then i know that a lof of doctors are against the euthanasia in that case ( and this is why ppl shouldn't ask them to do that)..u know i see a lot of time some family of patient who asking for the euthanasia because they think that the patient suffer but the doctor know what he do!!! and then he know in which case he should do that or not... personally even if the euthanasia is forbidden, i will use it later only for when i judge that it will be really necessary ..because when u are the one who will end the life of another person..i can tell u that this is a really big psychological problem....because a life is a life ...
Sustaining life thru ventilator and such can be detrimental to the pt. The pain and discomfort that arise from the machines could be traumatizing to the pt and family. Not to mention that while living in this condition, you are prone to nosocomial infection and other complications which even makes your life harder to live. Just imagine that you are the one in the bed, where you cannot do anything for yourself, having tubes stick all over you, how would it feel like? Like hiake said, its a take on how you view the action of putting someone out of their misery as murder or an act of mercy.
Ah.. I see what you're trying to say. The whole "living on a machine" aspect got me confused because my say in this is that not every euthanasia patient is "living off a machine" before euthanasia is to be implemented. In other words, you do not need to be in pain or is suffocating to undergo the procedure. You can be in healthy shape with a disease like AIDS or Cancer, knowing that you have 4-5 months to live, but still want to die earlier because you don't want to suffer a painful death when that AIDS or Cancer strikes. You guys are giving off the idea that euthanasia patients are those who are moments from their death -- living and breathing because the machine is there. It's not true of all or most cases, at least from what I've seen and heard about in the cases in Holland.
Aids or cancer pts hardly need machines to sustain life. Euthanasia could be used in advance directives where pt expresses the wish to have it when he/ she is young and is not afflicted by any disease. However, this is method is only available in some countries.
Well.. your dictionary needs some updating then. natural death: death by disease or old age rather than by an act of violence or an accident http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861696696/natural_death.html However, when I wrote 'die naturally', I wasn't refering to 'natural death' as defined above. What I meant was: those who can only live with the support of machines, will 'naturally' die without them. Miscommunication there.. lol.. 'life prolonged by a machine'. How vague is that? Life prolonged='the normal elderly population who depend on machines to perform everyday tasks'?? If you still can perform everyday tasks, where does euthanasia fit in? Obviously it only applies to those who are on the verge of dying and under great suffering that everyday tasks are already out of the equation. Need more clarifications? Edit: just read your latest post.. seems like we have different understanding of the term euthanasia.. so hopefully everything is clear now
That's what I'm trying to say ... NOT ALL PATIENTS undergoing euthanasia needs to live by machines, thus .. why is the point of living off of machines even relevant here? I am still baffled as to why xiaojia would rather "die naturally than prolonged life by a machine." I don't see any relevance. Euthanasia is only legal in so many places -- the Netherlands, Oregon (U.S.) and Belgium. The Netherlands is the ONLY country where the "young" (at least age 12) can request for it, but the parents MUST ALSO agree to it (if the youngster is between the ages of 12-16).
