First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Assisted Suicide
2986 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / F / Soon to be SCAD
Offline
Posted 2/28/08
Assisted suicide is defined as actively doing something to cause anothers death (assuming the other is willing.) Withholding medication would not be an example, however, providing them with an overdose would.

There was a case where an elderly man suffered from cancer. He pleaded with his wife to end his life- for he had lived a long life and did not want to suffer anymore. His wife finally broke down and agreed to give him poison. Later she was charged- how should she be charged and sentanced?

Another case is of an attempted suicide. He had shot himself in the face, but failed to sever his brain stem or hit his hind lobes. Beacause his frontal lobe was gone, every memory and personality trait that made him human was gone. He didn't even have a face. The hospital had to find a way to end this mans life. They opted on withholding antibiotics in order to let him die of infection. While this is not assisted suicide, had they been allowed to kill him in a different fashion, they may have been able to harvest his organs in order to save others lives.

I ask you this, should assisted suicide be legal or not? If so, is it legal in all cases or for medical professionals only.

(PS: Seeing as I have to write a paper against it, please feel free to disagree with each other and get some agruments going^.^)
Posted 2/28/08

I ask you this, should assisted suicide be legal or not? If so, is it legal in all cases or for medical professionals only.

(PS: Seeing as I have to write a paper against it, please feel free to disagree with each other and get some agruments going^.^)

You have a paper on this? This is hard.

My answer would be yes and no.

First case.
She as a wife would not bear to see her husband living the rest of his life in pain. Not that she doesn't have a choice but she relented when her husband ask her to feed him poison. In this case she was partly at fault because she should have send her husband to a counselor as he had suicidal thoughts but of course we should take into account that she was confused(i assumed she was due to her husband being depressed and he wants to die). And also you did not mention whether these couple are facing and problem like financially. Anyways, the fact that she decided to grant his wish(to die) somewhat proof that he is actually given up hope on himself and there is practically nothing much she can do. Instead of charging her with murder or assisted suicide or whatever, the court should send her for psychological treatment because i'm pretty much sure that this incident definitely will leave a huge impact in her life.

Case 2.
It is not mention why he wanted to die. So I'll just assume.
He shot himself in the face, now he has no face. It is already bad enough he did not die after shooting himself and he had to suffer again when the medical professional withhold antibiotics so that he can die from an infection. I may not be a medical professional but i'm still human with feelings. Medical Professional has a duty to safe life and in this case that man is beyond hope and there is nothing the doctors can do. So they have no choice or should i say, to relief the man from future pain and sufferings. I say, they did the right thing(but i still do not understand why they had to withhold his antibiotics. Is there like no other methods?)Why not cut of the life support machine? At least he would die a fast death instead of infection which apparently is a slow painful way of dying. And also maybe there is a chance to save his organs to give a new life to other patients who still have a will to live.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, It should only be legalized on a case to case basis.

Ghost Moderator
AHTL 
87563 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / Norway
Online
Posted 2/28/08
Duplicate mate, trust me.
8432 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 2/28/08
Case 1: I find no problem with assisting suicide. He was clearly conscious and knew what he was doing and was clearly in pain. Why strip him of the right to choose when he should die. Don't give me crap about suicide being wrong, everyone should be able to make their own choice in this matter. It does not affect other people, heck it could probably save the government a medical bill.

Case 2: Not every person can be an organ donor, he probably didn't have the proper papers signed for organs to be donated. I also believe there is legal ramifications for disconnecting a patient's life support without his proper consent but don't quote me on that.
Posted 2/28/08
Wah~ Duplicate....<.< Though you are relating this directly to specific cases, so I won't report that....
http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-17334/Euthanasia.html

Floetry~
1433 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / New York
Offline
Posted 2/28/08
I'm for it, provided documentation exists that proves the individual wished to die. To keep someone incapable of but wishing for suicide alive is to declare that his life is not his own: the ultimate violation of human rights. Murder is not a part of this at all, providing there is proof that suicide was desired.

Your second case is not, as you note, assisted suicide, but it was justified. He was no longer human - no longer anything, really, but a body. As for harvesting the organs, I'm undecided on whether this should be forced upon people or not. It is such a waste to put perfectly good organs in the ground because of some useless tradition. It's not like we'll care when we're dead unless you believe that we somehow get to use them again some day. If he had marked down that he wished to be an organ donor, though, they obviously made a poor decision.
2986 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / F / Soon to be SCAD
Offline
Posted 2/28/08

luvuah wrote:
(but i still do not understand why they had to withhold his antibiotics. Is there like no other methods?)Why not cut of the life support machine?


There was no life support machine, his hind lobe in charge of basic life function was whole. None of his other vital organs were injured. If they had given him some drug to kill him, it would have been murder, or assisted suicide. So, there really wasn't another way... well, at least not one that I or the hospital could think of.
Posted 2/28/08
Only do that like in High School of the Dead.
3672 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / the chair in fron...
Offline
Posted 2/28/08

chocofluffywhip wrote:

Another case is of an attempted suicide. He had shot himself in the face, but failed to sever his brain stem or hit his hind lobes. Beacause his frontal lobe was gone, every memory and personality trait that made him human was gone. He didn't even have a face. The hospital had to find a way to end this mans life. They opted on withholding antibiotics in order to let him die of infection. While this is not assisted suicide, had they been allowed to kill him in a different fashion, they may have been able to harvest his organs in order to save others lives.

I ask you this, should assisted suicide be legal or not? If so, is it legal in all cases or for medical professionals only.

(PS: Seeing as I have to write a paper against it, please feel free to disagree with each other and get some agruments going^.^)


isnt this euthanasia??....for the 1st situation it is a crime because it is illegal to kill a person if they have at least 1% chance of recovering,every person has the right to live (even if they dont want to) whilst on the second part there is NO CHANCE OF RECOVERY(veggie) so it's not a surprise to me that the doctors cut off his medication
46782 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / right now in ruff...
Offline
Posted 2/28/08
i think this question needs some further re examining for example this type of question needs to consider the psychological points. The above is an interesting case and logically its reasonable. Cancer is the worst thing in the world and no one should go through all that suffering. So it is reasonable to choose to die. Therefore the woman should not be charged since she was helping her husband. However what if the husband was mentally unstable, she does not have the proper education to determine if her husband is mentally unstable. Maybe her husband has some sort of mentality disease but she did not know (it is possible). Therefore she should not have the choice of assisting her husband to commit suicide. Yet she should also not be charged since she was unaware and its not like her husband would of chraged her anyway. Sure the courts could say "then you should of seeked some pshychiatric help" but she did not know what to do, anyone would not know. She did not do it intentionally, she was somewhat forced, she did it out of love (this has to be proven tho) her husband pleaded with her which shows that she was against it and she needed some encouragement.

Second case was correct in their choice since professionals were able to reason as to why the man should not live.

So it comes down to wether legalize it or not the answer is yes but only for TRAINED Proessionals and medical reasons.

Consider this vague case a man wants his bestfriend to assist him in killing himself becasue his girlfriend left him. This man is obvioulsy unstable and needs professional help there fore the friend should not help in the suicide but rather refer to a professional. Remember one thing that if you want to make a law, it needs to cover all cases such as the vague one I made up.

937 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Next to You
Offline
Posted 2/28/08
Suiside is wrong. As a result of him not being strong ... the wife couldnt be strong. She killed him and Murder is wrong no matter who does it.
Posted 2/28/08
I think it's legal in Oregon and Washington
1043 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/28/08
I think it should be legal. I mean, I live in America and we're supposed to be free and stuff but if we say we want to die we get stopped and I can sort of understand why but if a old man with cancer wants to just hurry up and end it and not suffer why deny him the right? I think it was pretty stupid to charge the woman for his death, he wanted it and she was reluctant at first he should have his own say over what he wants to do with HIS life.

As for the second case, I really don't know what to say. I think they should've done it. He wasn't even a person left, the poor guy couldn't do anything. He'd sit wasting space in a hospital bed or at home being looked after by someone who probably has other things they need to do and has their own lives to live which they couldn't because they would have to watch this veggie til he died. And then his organ would've probably gone to waste in the ground when they buried him. Completely off note but I think cemetaries are pretty useless in themselves, dead people more than likely couldn't care less what happens to their body it's the soul that a majority worry about so why waste space that people who don't have homes at the moment could be living on, ne? Ehh I'm going to start rambling in a bit, time for dinner!
2568 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / queen city of the...
Offline
Posted 2/28/08
what an headache!!! owws....
Posted 2/28/08
it's murder.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.