Assisted Suicide Legal in CA Today

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by nbs2, Jun 9, 2016.

  1. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #1
    Assisted suicide is now legal in California. And the NY Times has a story that highlights my personal struggle with how I feel about it.

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/06/1...-doctors.html?referer=https://www.google.com/

    In being up front, I am not a fan of abortion. I do think it should be legal in specific circumstances, but should not be generally so. Given that it is legal, I think there should be a hard look at it before a final decision is made. While you may eventually have another child, that is a different being and different entity, and thus an irreversible decision.

    I know this is not a popular position, and stands in contrast to currently accepted politics and jurisprudence, but it is still mine. I give you that background not to muddle the issue, but to help frame my position on the matter at hand.

    My position on assisted suicide is similar, but maybe a little more liberal. I don't like it and don't know if it is right. But, the decision does not impact the development of another sentient being and thus should solely rest with the individual.

    While I appreciate the struggle many doctors are having with how to work within the law, I believe they have a duty and obligation to work with the decisions of a patient who is of sound mind, or made such declaration while in that mental state.

    I can't understand how we can allow so many restrictions on this while being so liberal elsewhere. Being allowed to not just deny medication but refuse referral, allowing doctors to push back on the decision, etc? If this was an abortion-restriction measure in Kentucky, the same CA folks that are supportive of this would be demanding that those hicks and rednecks be tossed out of office.

    Maybe it's just the cautious first steps of a brave new world?
     
  2. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #2
    If you are near death and suffering for air for weeks why should you not be allowed to die with dignity?
     
  3. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #3
    I'm all for it for terminally ill patients. If one has no quality of life left, I see no reason they shouldn't be allowed to end their pain and suffering.

    We need a national discussion on end of life care. We spend way too much time, resources and money keeping those with little to no quality of life alive. IIRC, 25% of Medicare dollars spent are for the last year of people's lives. But we can't have adult conversations because death panels.
     
  4. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #4
    We are kind enough to euthanize animals, I don't see why we shouldn't give people that same option. I don't think I would ever use it, but if I had a terminal disease it would be comforting to know that euthanasia was an option if things got too painful.
     
  5. CalWizrd Suspended

    CalWizrd

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Location:
    NYC/Raleigh, NC
    #5
    As one with a terminal disease, I firmly believe in my right to end my life should it be determined to be my choice.
     
  6. nbs2 thread starter macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #6
    So are we just the exception here? I don't see any public outcry against the CA restrictions or the 50% of doctors who would refuse to write the script.

    Or is it a case of others being ok with it, but not interested in making a fuss about the limitations since it doesn't affect them?
     
  7. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #7
    I am in favor of one having the right to end their life if they are within 6 months of impending death. The question is where does the line move to if at all. Eventually those with debilitating diseases will want the right because who wants to live with severe Rheumatoid Arthritis or COPD. You in essence are telling some to live with their pain and others have an out. What if I don't want to take the long and dark trip down Alzheimer's lane? Why can't I end it before I'm robbed of my mind?
     
  8. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #8
    Anybody who is suffering from a terminal illness, physical or mental, should have the right to check out whenever they want, provided their decision is independently approved by a physician. No time limits and no restrictions on which diseases are permissible. If they are sane and they make the decision themselves, then nobody has the right to say no to that person.
     
  9. caesarp macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    #9
    Good, I'll move to CA if Trump is elected.

    And I'm not sure an 8 week old fetus is a "sentient" being.

    I am a fan of abortion (I'm not pro choice, I'm pro abortion). We have too many people in this world and not enough money to feed all the babies and too many single mom's having kids (afraid to get abortions or told its wrong). Look death is a certainty - its just a matter of when. If you are so against killing things, why should we allow cars. We know, literally know, that despite all the new safety features, between 30,000 to 40,000 actual born human beings will die in automobile accidents each and EVERY year. So if you are pro-life, you should be anti-car. Since pro-lifers aren't against cars, their position is meaningless. It just sounds nice and good and cheerful and kind to say "I'm for the fetuses". Well, the world isn't all butterflies and flowers.
     
  10. heehee macrumors 68020

    heehee

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    Location:
    Same country as Santa Claus
    #10
    Because God said its not your turn.

    There is no law in Canada now against dying with dignity, I for the life of me can't figure out why there was ever a law like this to be with.
     
  11. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #11
    Also if you are pro-life you should also be against vending machines and champagne corks. :rolleyes:
     
  12. caesarp macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    #12
    And menstruation and male masturbation. Those are millions of potential babies -- dammit.
     
  13. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #13
    Well, that wouldn't be a problem at all if we didn't randomly decide on a 6 month timeline....

    My view, your body, your decision, end of story.
    --- Post Merged, Jun 9, 2016 ---
    And for those of us that understand that sky fairies aren't supposed to be a factor in lawmaking?
     
  14. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #14
    You are going to have a very difficult time sanctioning doctors to prescribe a cocktail that will end someones life simply because they decide it's time to check out. I don't think there's but a handful of doctors in the world who would be so cavalier about it. If you don't want to go on, start your car in your garage or chew on the end of a .45acp.
     
  15. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #15
    That's great and all, but there's no reason it should be illegal. There's no reason to force doctors to participate either.

    You honestly think doctors that help with assisted suicide are cavalier about it? This is based on....what exactly?
     
  16. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #16
    I don't think doctors who help with assisted suicide in it's current form are cavalier about it. But that's different from saying "When ever you feel the need to end it" terminal illness or not. You'll have a hard time finding a doctor who will prescribe anyone the medications simply because they're sick and tired of getting ear infections.
     
  17. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #17

    Is "Death panel" not a term of imposition, usually used to discuss denial of care, often with the context of FUD. The use of "death panel" as denying care doesn't mean those who say that term are incorrect. People are just hyper-focused on that one definition or aspect. Which is likely the most thought-of aspect by default. "Assisted suicide" already has its own moniker, which lacks sufficient openendedness for alternative definitions or scope.
     
  18. A.Goldberg macrumors 68000

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #18
    I'm sure there will be pharmacists against this practice too, and therefore potential difficulties getting the cocktail.

    Assisted Suicide is a whole can of worms. I completely understand terminally ill people would want to utilize it, and I support that. At the same time, I'm just not sure what what point you draw the line of acceptable vs. unacceptable conditions. I want to end my life because I have lung cancer and I can't breath and have zero quality of life vs. I have Alzheimer's vs I'm in chronic pain. Also, what measures are in place for family members who do not consent and then petition their loved one is crazy?

    As a side note and not the sole reason, there so much money is spent on palliative care- which can go on for months. This might help cut some costs.
     
  19. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #19
    Do you have any reason to believe this is or will actually happen? We can huff and puff about hypotheticals all day, but I'm not going worry about it. Human nature is life preserving at it's core (your body will knock you out when needed to protect itself) so as far as the underlined...let's not diminish those who have come to this difficult decision.
     
  20. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #20
    The Hippocratic Oath would arguably prevent them from ending lives.

    The irony is, we all sit and say "those of sound mind". What if somebody not completely sound could form a cogent sentence as to why one would want to die? Yet wouldn't a person who is suffering not be in sound mind so therefore we would strive to make a person not suffer by making their life complete as opposed to discarded?

    The criteria for a person wanting to end their life, and then the medical industry indulging that, would need considerable thought, nuance, and regulation.
     
  21. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #21
    Tell me where the line is drawn then? Cause your statement makes it sound like it's open ended.
     
  22. oneMadRssn macrumors 68040

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #22
    Everyone keeps talking about supporting or not supporting it. Frankly, whether we as individuals support it or not is totally irrelevant.

    If someone truly wants to end their life, no law is going to stop them and no punishment will be a deterrent. By definition, if they succeed, none of that matters. Thus, legislating it away is utterly idiotic. Instead, I think the governments role should be do everything it can to ensure those that want to end their life have options (social services, medical care, counseling, etc), some of which are designed to lead them away from this decision. At least one of the options should still be to let them do it in the cleanest and safest (to others) way possible.

    Support or not, it will happen. The question is, do we want it to be graphic, dangerous, and made from a place of desperation, or clean, pain free, and made from a well-informed decision?
     
  23. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #23
    Frankly it is, but that wasn't in reference to when a doctor is involved (which is the topic at hand). I should have been more clear about that, sorry.

    I'm referring to the criminalization of suicide.
     
  24. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #24
    Have you ever met someone who was prosecuted for killing themselves? Have you ever met someone who was prosecuted for attempting suicide?
     
  25. caesarp macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    #25
    People have been prosecuted for assisting in suicide (including, famously, Dr. Kevorkian)
     

Share This Page