Voluntary Euthanasia.?

Question

Is there an arguement for voluntary Euthanasia?
For example, a person dying from Cancer or a person who has become so incapacitated that there life has no meaning.
That is to say that they cannot move, communicate vocally, or otherwise, sustained perpetually on life support.
There is a film starring Richard Dreyfus called "Who's life is it anyway?" Where due an accident he is paralysed from the neck down & has to spend his life in a hospital supported by machines. He argues that he should be able to decide for himself how he wishes to live or die. We put animals down "Humanely" but why do we let people suffer unecessarily so. I think if a person has to spend there whole of their remaining life either in severe pain or not have the ability to make or communicate a decision for themselves, where there life is only sustained because of the decision of others, provided that the person can by any means possible communicate their wishes be given the option to end their lives with dignity.

Answer 1

I did a lot of research into this for a French A-Level project. In essence, the situation at the moment is:

UK - illegal.
USA - illegal, except for Oregon.
Holland - Not totally legal, but common practice.

The UK situation, however, may be changing, thanks to the work of Lord Joffe, who introduced the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill 2005 to Parliament. His research into voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide unearthed a great deal of support, and inspired the creation of this Bill.. After a great deal of safeguards, very similar in structure to the safeguards of the Oregon Death with Dignity Act, were implemented to stop unscrupuous relatives from terminating life, the Bill received the backing of the Select Committee of the House Of Lords. However, Parliament then dissolved for the General Election, and the Bill was put on hold. The safeguards, for patient, staff, and family, include:

- The decision must be made by the person themselves, as opposed to relatives. In the case of people unable to make the decision, doctors may become involved, only as long as they stand to gain nothing from the death. They are not considered to be breaking their hippocratic oath to preserve life in this case.
- The patient must be considered sound of mind when making the decision, and reviewed by a team of psychiatrists, as well as speaking to several members of the health team about pallitive care (long-term care for the terminally ill)
- The medication must be taken by the patient himself, and can only be issued on the say-so of 2 doctors.
- Any member of the healthcare team - doctor, nurse, psychiatrist - does NOT have to be involved if they have any grounds for objection, whether they be religious, ethical, or otherwise. However, the patient's records must then be transferred to a different doctor within 48 hours.
- The patient has a right to change their mind at any time.

Despite the controversy this Bill has caused, it has significant backing, including from the public - over 140,000 petitions have been sent to Parliament.
With Lord Joffe at the helm, and with the backing of many people, such as www.dignityindying.org.uk, it is possible that this Bill may become an Act soon.

Answer 2

This is because we have religion which animals don't hence we preach the sanctity of human life. If a person decides to end their life then its suicide, if they get someone to help them end their life then its murder - either way its against the law currently in the UK. I think ultimately though, if it were made legal then the system would have so many problems of vulnerable people feeling pressurised to end their own lives simply so that they wouldn't feel they were a burden on others. I think you would also get people ending the live's of others when the person isn't able to say what they actually want, simply to meet the agenda of others (e.g. people turning off life support machines simply to get their inheritance faster rather than considering the wishes of the injured or dying person). The other problem is where do you draw the line. Once someone can end the life of another simply because they were sick or elderly anyway, and that form of murder is ok, how can one then punish someone who kills for another reason? Society will always generally be heavily against euthanasia simply because it makes people uneasy about their own beliefs and what they would really want in that situation.

Answer 3

I personally agree with voluntary euthanasia - I would not want to be at the end of my life, perhaps suffering from cancer and in terrible pain that cannot be relieved by morphine, and not be able to put an end to it. We all have to die, it is part of life, but we are human beings and should be able to decide for ourselves when enough is enough.
On the other hand, the argument above could also apply to someone suffering from mental illness, perhaps depression, who genuinely feels that their only relief is death. Obviously in this case, it would be abhorant to support the suicide of someone whose illness can be cured enabling them to live a normal life. At this point we need governance over the right to die.

The reason it is illegal in my opinion, is not necessarily to protect the depressed, but to protect vulnerable elderly people who could be murdered by greedy offspring. It is absolutely essential that the right to die with dignity and control is not pushed through into the statute books without long and careful thought on how to prevent even one murder.

I know that some countries have medically assisted deaths, whereby the patient is hooked to a machine that will intravenously deliver a lethal injection only when the patients themselves are ready. Having this "procedure" only available in a hospital setting with wide open decision making, that is easily scrutanised for coercement or other evil intent may make it easier to legislate for. I myself could not end the life of another, and I do not expect anyone to actually kill me. It is not right that medical staff be put in the position where they give the lethal dose. Of course in many acute wards, where people are in terrible mortal pain, upping slightly the dose of morphine does let the person slip away in peace. It is tragic that it has to be done this way, just in case there is abuse being covered up.

Religion should stay out of modern lawmaking unless it has something actually useful to add - a blanket "god says no" doesn't cut it in a sophisticated society. Just look at the harm religion and its adherents are doing in the middle east. If you dont know about that then do some of your own research, cos this isn't the place to go into it.

Answer 4

I completely argree with you and this is something that I have questioned myself...although, strangely many people don't share my views on this. I am in nursing school, and I have seen people in so much pain...and I wonder, for what? I don't think there is any dignity in some of the pain and suffering that I have seen. As a professional, I follow the laws of the land and would never participate in euthanasia, but I wish the laws weren't what they are.

Answer 5

There is definitely an argument AGAINST voluntary euthanasia as far as I'm concerned. The way I look at it: God created us, and then bought us with the blood of His Son, Jesus Christ. The Bible says "we are not our own, because we are bought with a price.

That said, I have worked in nursing homes and have seen the quality of life of some residents go from good to nil, and they live on and on in that state. It is heartbreaking, but I don't feel we have the right to "Play God".

As a child I witnessed my grandmother (who lived in Germany) commit suicide. She became ill with cervical cancer about 30 years ago. When her doctor told her that there was no more they could do to help her recover or manage her pain, she chose to take the suicide pill that is legal there. We were called to come to her home as soon as she took it and stayed by her side until she died about 7 p.m. It was a horrible day, and I'll never forget it. It is not a pleasant way to die - trust me!

Thanks for the opportunity to voice my opinion - God bless!

Answer 6

I am in full agreement with you ! I have become a member of
a voluntary euthanasia society, even so I am a fit and health person, but things can change in a split second and I would absolutely hate to hang on computers for the rest of my days!

Answer 7

The argument for this is strong. But this sort of decision should only be accepted from a person who is of sound mind. If a person is quite clearly lucid and mentally stable when they request assisted suicide then by all means allow it. But if there is any doubt as to their mental health then I don't think it should be allowed. Personally if I had a seriously debilitating disease then I think I'd like the choice. Not saying of course that I'd necessarily go with it.

Answer 8

I have had to watch a very dear uncle slowly die of stomach cancer and he ask to be allowed to die many times as his sight was failing and he was bed bound for a long time, he had served in Burma and was on the Burma railway, had travelled the world working for Christian and other aid agencies and asked one simple question, "why can i not be allowed to die at my choosing and with dignity? its cruel to keep me alive like this when i have led such an active life, its worse than prison" we can die for our country or at the hand of another through murder, but we are denied the ultimate freedom of choice for our own fate.

Answer 9

I wont bother you with 'religious' or 'ethical'
Diatribe ....

If one is "lucky" , "one" lives around 30.000
DAYS. WHAT difference would it make , to
live 29.900 or 30.100 DAYS ?

In 100 YEARS time, THIS SOCIETY (the
whole lot) AND YOU AND I , will not be
around to worry about , whether ANYONE
ceased to exist at 21 becoz of War, or at 65
bcoz of Disease. The NEW SOCIETY will not
give a damn (and rightly so)...

Suicide is a FACT OF LIFE .
IMHO a needle from Healthcare Pro's
beats a Blood-spattered WALL , or a ROPE
anytime....

Once one UNDERSTANDS , people are
MARGINALLY more intelligent PRIMATES
the "question" becomes easier.....

Answer 10

I agree with you. Having said that I know a woman who is suffering motor neurone disease, virtually paralysed from neck down, cant breathe for herself or do anything for herself, but can speak and is very intelligent. She doesnt believe in euthansia and is very opposed to it. She still believes she has some quality of life.
So I suppose just because we believe someone is suffering doesnt mean they are.
Each to their own.