Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by _Robert_ on September 10, 2013 at 7:38pm

This is a most challenging dilemma. I am not sure how you could guard against that sort of abuse.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Melvinotis on September 10, 2013 at 8:22pm

I have a friend whose dad runs a 'power of attorney' scam in Florida for older folks who don't trust their children. He would be just the type to take advantage of these laws if it proved to be to his advantage (rather than his clients). There's a lot more like him out there than anyone would be comfortable with.

If it were possible to curb that scuzzy little part of society, I would be all for it being nationwide.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by SteveInCO on September 10, 2013 at 8:24pm

That's the only intelligent argument I have seen--how to ensure the suicide actually really does want it.  (It's a similar dynamic to people arguing women should not be allowed to wear a veil, because there's no way to know she really wants to wear it, as opposed to her husband and neighbors demanding it of her.)

I believe the Oregon law simply allows the doctor to prescribe the suicide med, and the patient can take it whenever they want to.  Rarely do they actually do so, but the comfort of knowing that they can end their pain whenever they want is extremely helpful; they don't feel trapped and have a way out if it gets worse.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Unseen on September 10, 2013 at 8:35pm

Yeah, but there are other ways of abusing elders. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Unseen on September 10, 2013 at 8:50pm

In Oregon, there are safeguards, but of course those opposed to assisted suicide stridently plead that the safeguards won't always work.

What, tell me, always works?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ed on September 10, 2013 at 8:53pm

As I write my eighty two year old uncle lies in a bed at a convalescence home, basically comatose, heavily sedated with morphine to counteract the pain of stage four bone cancer. He now weighs less than a hundred pounds and assistants are by his side 24-7. He is incontinent and fed intravenously. 

Why in this world someone in his condition should be denied a dignified exit is beyond me. We should all have the right to stipulate that when certain conditions of impairment arrive we can gracefully receive that terminal cocktail that ensures no further pain is necessary. The right to a dignified death trumps the overrated Oath of Hippocrates.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Unseen on September 10, 2013 at 8:57pm

I asked a friend once, that if ever a situation arose where I was no longer mentally sharp, to find a way to kill me if she could do it with impunity. (Let's see if archie can resist commenting on that one.) She said she would.

I don't think she'll do it, though.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Unseen on September 11, 2013 at 8:38am

LOL

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by SteveInCO on September 11, 2013 at 4:36am

I understand that most doctors, having seen the things that happen in our system which will try like crazy to keep you alive even in situations like this, have filed DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) orders.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doug Reardon on September 10, 2013 at 9:24pm

"grave" doubts?  you must be joking!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gregg R Thomas on September 11, 2013 at 9:42am

@Unseen;

"Any good arguments AGAINST assisted suicide?"

None that I can think of.  When will you be needing help? :D

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Unseen on September 11, 2013 at 9:54am

I knew I'd be opening up a bandora's pox.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page