Hope For The Dying

[Loren Pechtel]

I hate to admit it, really it isn't something that should be funny but I giggle anyway when I think about it. I think about all the parents and grandparents who abused their kids and grandkids being scared of this assisted suicide stuff being "abused" and forced on them.

I wonder if there is actually a relationship--those that are afraid of it are that way because of what they did to their kids.

 

[BH]

I would not be surprised if that were the case Loren.

 

[TomC]

I would not be surprised if that were the case Loren.

I don't doubt that exists.
I'm much more concerned about the possibility of abuse. A person who is elderly and terminally ill might be surrounded by caring people.
But they might have people who have a vested interest in their death being sooner rather than later. Impatient heirs, insurance companies, there could well be plenty of folks who want Grandma to kick the bucket as soon as possible.
Tom

 

[DBT]

Love abounds.

 

[southernhybrid]

I would not be surprised if that were the case Loren.

I don't doubt that exists.
I'm much more concerned about the possibility of abuse. A person who is elderly and terminally ill might be surrounded by caring people.
But they might have people who have a vested interest in their death being sooner rather than later. Impatient heirs, insurance companies, there could well be plenty of folks who want Grandma to kick the bucket as soon as possible.
Tom

In the states in the US that have made assisted suicide legal, Grandma would have to be in her right mind and have at least one or in some cases more than one physician certify that she has no more than 6 months to live. I think it would be difficult to abuse these regulations, and I've had so many frail elderly patients in the past who told me they were ready to go and life no longer held any purpose for them. There are countries where euthanasia is far less regulated, but I'm not aware of whether or not these laws have caused any abuse.

Sometimes I think my sister hoped that our mom would die, but she was 97, had late stage dementia and was living in a nursing home, so she didn't have much quality of life, despite, imo, the nursing home was a good one. My sister would never have done anything to purposely help our mother die, despite knowing that our mom used to tell me that she never wanted to live so long. I would never have done anything to hurt her either. I still enjoyed doing FaceTime with her, despite knowing she wouldn't remember our conversations for more than a minute or two, if that, but she knew who I was right up to the end, when she got Covid and died shortly after recovering from it. Children aren't the ones who. have the power to choose euthanasia for a parent, so I don't see that happening, at least not under the current laws.

Based on my many years as a home health nurse, especially in the late 70s and 80s, I found giving aggressive end of life care to frail older adults who were often confused, including feeding tubes and in some cases respirators, to be far more abusive than allowing an older adult with a terminal medical condition to be eased out gently if that is their choice. We do it for our pets, who most of us think of as family members, why do we deny it to our human family members when they are endlessly suffering? That's just my opinion. I don't want to fight about it. It's just that I saw so much end of life suffering when I worked as a professional nurse.

 

[bilby]

The idea that legalised suicide will lead to significant numbers of murders is Roman Catholic Church propaganda.

People who want to murder elderly relatives already do so.

Those who don't, won't start doing so because the law changes to make it happen, as long as you can persuade two doctors that the lucid patient (who is telling them otherwise) that it is what their patient really wants.

It's a standard RCC slippery slope fallacy, and it's obviously irrational - but like all good propaganda, contains an emotional hook.

 

[Lion IRC]

People who want to murder elderly relatives already do so.

...so let's help them by providing liberalized euthanasia laws - more leverage to apply to elderly, sick relatives whose health care costs are burning up the inheritance.

 

[bilby]

People who want to murder elderly relatives already do so.

Yes. Because it's not particularly difficult to do, and murderous psychopaths aren't known for being put off by mere laws.

...so let's help them by providing liberalized euthanasia laws - more leverage to apply to elderly, sick relatives whose health care costs are burning up the inheritance.

How does that help them? Liberalized euthanasia laws or not, secretly giving granny an overdose, or smothering her with a pillow, is STILL murder; And STILL easier than getting a couple of independent medical experts to conspire in a needlessly complex murder plot.

And of course you are ignoring the benefits of reduced suffering.

Although I wouldn't be shocked to hear that you think suffering is good, noble, and right. Because your ethics are mostly derived from the depraved and immoral teachings of a bunch of religious totalitarian kooks.

 

[pood]

Although I wouldn't be shocked to hear that you think suffering is good, noble, and right. Because your ethics are mostly derived from the depraved and immoral teachings of a bunch of religious totalitarian kooks.

That was the gist of Dostoevsky’s novel Crime and Punishment, that suffering redemptive. However, I still love Dostoevsky.

 

[DBT]

People who want to murder elderly relatives already do so.

...so let's help them by providing liberalized euthanasia laws - more leverage to apply to elderly, sick relatives whose health care costs are burning up the inheritance.

Pain and suffering is not a consideration?

 

[Lion IRC]

Pain and suffering is not a consideration?

Of course it is.
The question is about our response.
There's compassionate ways to alleviate pain that don't involve fast-tracking a person's death. (Or making a person think that's the best outcome for all concerned )

Elderly, vulnerable terminally ill people should not have to have their suffering exacerbated by the stress of thinking they are a burden.

 

[DBT]

Why say 'fast track?' There are conditions that do cause tremendous suffering and utterly destroy quality of life. If we do it for our pets as an act of mercy, with checks and balances to stop those who would use euthanasia for personal gain, why not us?

 

[bilby]

Pain and suffering is not a consideration?

Of course it is.
The question is about our response.
There's compassionate ways to alleviate pain that don't involve fast-tracking a person's death. (Or making a person think that's the best outcome for all concerned )

Not always. And it's for THEM to judge, not you or I.

Elderly, vulnerable terminally ill people should not have to have their suffering exacerbated by the stress of thinking they are a burden.

Nobody but you is suggesting that they are.

You are the one in this thread who is genuinely expecting voluntary euthanasia to be abused. Nobody else thinks of terminally ill sufferers of constant pain as plausible murder victims.

 

[southernhybrid]

Pain and suffering is not a consideration?

Of course it is.
The question is about our response.
There's compassionate ways to alleviate pain that don't involve fast-tracking a person's death. (Or making a person think that's the best outcome for all concerned )

Elderly, vulnerable terminally ill people should not have to have their suffering exacerbated by the stress of thinking they are a burden.

No, there aren't always way to alleviate pain and suffering. I know because I cared for and advocated for them for many years prior to retirement. Euthanasia isn't legal in my state but the 97 year old man, who I visited many times while working part time in home health is an example. Whenever I pulled into his driveway, I could hear him screaming, Lordy, Lordy, Lordy. Please take me now. Please take me now." His God apparently didn't hear his plea. I'm sure I mentioned this case earlier in this thread or somewhere else. I felt so bad for him that it was sometimes hard to get out of my car and do the best I could to help his family provide care and cope. I doubt you have a background in a medical profession or you would know better than to claim there are ways to relieve all pain and suffering. Sure, doctors and nurses try, but pain meds stop working after one builds up a tolerance. AT least it appears that we have less aggressive end of life care now, compared to when I was young.

I have helped get a few people out of abusive homes, but sometimes the person refuses to leave, and if they are in their right minds, they have the right to remain in the home, even if they realize that their families consider them a burden. In an ideal world, this wouldn't be an issue, but we don't live in such a world. Our nursing homes in the US have been taken over by large corporations. Most are under staffed and the residents are often neglected and sometimes abused. I would strongly prefer to be eased out of life than be forced to live in such a place. Most children don't want or are unable to care for their frail relatives these days. Plus, a lot of people don't even have children.

A few months ago, I had to have a dog, who I loved like a family member, gently euthanized, after the vet was able to temporarily relieve her severe nausea and vomiting. She had a huge tumor over her liver that couldn't be treated. I was heartbroken, but knew that letting her go was the kindest thing to do. I watched the vet very gently ease her out of life without any distress. I thought to myself that I'd love to go that way if and when I reach the point where I am terminally ill or experiencing pain and suffering that can't be relieved. Why do we deny humans the compassionate euthanasia that we give to the pets that we love and cherish?