I think the choice is clear when the "patient" is awake, conscious, and not sick to the point that they can't make decisions for themselves...if they wish to end their suffering, and have no hope of a cure or surviving long, they should be able to choose that option. I think it would be horribly cruel to demand someone live in constant pain and agony for a few weeks or months while their body slowly destroys itself just because somebody else thinks suicide is wrong.
Things get more difficult when you're dealing with patients that are in comas or otherwise incapacitated -- if they haven't left a living will giving specific instructions, how do we know what they would want? Even family members who have been given power of attorney don't always make decisions in the best interests of incapacitated people...
For me the deciding factor is what the individual person wants. If they're able to make that decision for themselves, who am I to insist they suffer in great pain? It should be their decision entirely. With incapacitated people, if they haven't left specific instructions in a living will, then I think we should err on the side of life in most cases, since ending a life in those cases rules out any other options or possibilities.
2006-12-16 03:31:49
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I believe it should be the person right & the doctor should be able to charge a fee. I know if i had a terminal illness i would perfer to go out on my decision than lay there like a vegtable.
2006-12-16 11:29:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by god 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's their body, and their choice....wait, it sounds like I'm talking about abortion...
I don't get the double standard. If a woman can choose to have a doctor assist her in euthanizing her unborn baby, then a doctor should be able to help you euthanize yourself.
2006-12-16 11:28:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by smellyfoot ™ 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think that if a person is so horrible off and there is no chance of them getting better, then it should be allowed.
I watched my Nana die, visiting her everyday in the hospital and she never even knew that I, or any one else who visited her was there. She was on so many drugs that she had no idea what was going on around her. I don't think that anyone wants to be kept alive on machine and be completely miserable and a vegetable so we should not make them.
2006-12-16 11:29:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
As long as the person is seeking it for their own good (and not because someone is whispering in their ear to kill themself) then I say its ok. I hate where people bring their spouse or loved one to believe that they need to die so they can obtain $$, etc. But if the person is truly sick and needs relief (in their chosen beliefes of afterlife), then let them.
2006-12-16 12:09:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by omnislash7377 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's illegal for a reason.
At first it would just be people who are dying slowly and terribly.
But I think that eventually it would be misused to get rid of chronically ill (not terminally ill) people who are a nuisance and drain on their family's or the government's finances.
2006-12-16 11:29:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
A person who is terminally ill should be allowed to die with dignity. We also this for our pets. Human beings should be allowed to do the same
2006-12-16 11:28:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by bisquedog 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
i think the humane society should hire
dr kevorkian to assist pitbulls in commiting
suicide.
2006-12-16 12:00:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by tanyasbeavereaterg`,`,` 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
Not acceptable. It's wrong.
And that is my opinion.
MERRY CHRISTMAS and have a nice day.
Thank you very much, while you're up!!!!
2006-12-16 11:35:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by producer_vortex 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Doctors take an oath. They are not supposed to kill people. In my opinion that should include babies.
2006-12-16 11:26:48
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋