whats your opinion on euthanasia?

Question

it should be compulsary in nursing homes.....there a real drain on the council arent they?

its not murder its cleaning up of old pepole who stink and shite every where!

also nursing homes are basically "waiting rooms for death" anyway so why make them wait?

TO BARRY G DO I LOOK LIKE A GEEZER? IM ALL WOMAN SWEETIE!

Answer 1

Why stop at nursing homes? First off we need a test to euthanize stupid and welfarian people, get the drain on the economy fixed and stupid people off the streets where they can influence our children. Next we would move on to the butt wipes of the country who want to spread their hatred and ignorance.There would have to be a rehab program first to improve intelligence and temper before actually actually Killing Them...but if they weren't responding or caused a lot of problems, Well there you go. Now we would leave animals and the helpless out of this and by that time there would be a world full of compassionate and patient people to help with them. They probably still have contributions to make to society. The only time we would kill off the infirmed or ill tempered animals was if they too did not respond to the second chance they were given. OR we could just do a blanket 3 strikes your out LITERALLY law. Sounds good to me! A little extreme? LOL Nana

Answer 2

Funnily enough i reckon quite a nice percentage of those in nursing homes would choose euthanasia given the choice.

Or at least would have when they still had their wits about when asked.

Then there would be the others that could afford the private care and lost the plot all the same. Would they have chosen euthanasia had they known they would end up as dribbling, incontinent copies of their former glorious selves?

Answer 3

Actually I agree on the subject of Euthanasia but not in your context.
I work every day trying to make patients deaths as stress and pain free as possible. Unfortunately some terminal illnesses such as Asbestosis are excruciatingly agonising and there is only so much morphine you can give. Patients with terminal illnesses should be given the freedom to end their suffering without any backlash from the "healthy inexperienced" politicians of this country.

I got in at 3am this morning after spending the last 18 hrs listening to the death rattle of a dear friend gasping and fighting for his breath. Tempting to help yes, but I cannot risk the rest of my life in Jail, so I put his headphones on him and played Louis Armstrong (his favourite singer) to him while silently crying at the injustice of it all. RIP Bill 12.31am 31/12/06

Answer 4

You sound like a real asshol*, unfortunately we live in a society where people are used and discarded when they get old. People are afraid of old age, and do anything to delay it, whilst youth is worshipped.

You are ignorant of the fact that one day you will become old, and weakened and dependant. Why dont you show some compassion instead of contempt, how would you treat your own mother or father when they get old? DIdnt they raise you, feed you and kept a roof over your head when you were growing up?

In fact you are a real example of how selfish and degenerate this consumerist society has become.

Answer 5

I do hope you are joking !?!

If not, think about how you want to be treated when you grow old !

While I'm not against euthanasia (for having seen long suffering illness), I do not think it should be made legal. It should be done out of great love for a suffering person, and the risk of getting caught (and possible sacrifice it involves) actually limits the instances where it could be badly used.

Answer 6

The responses here can definitely be used as an indication as to how many people either do not comprehend the dire nature that prompts people to drastic means, or do not want to deal with the issue of death head on, exercised by willing lucid parties.

People who have experienced extreme pain, are in extreme pain, near death experiences, without seeing the light of day, without hope, will generally disagree.

Under the present atmosphere, a quiet mass hysteria without knowing the facts, experiencing pain and near death, it is understandable that prevailing laws are in place to prevent miscreants from abusing authority and circumventing law.

As law is difficult to police, it has been always fallen back to education, influence, indoctrination, philosophical discursive, backed by the force of law, to dissuade that it is incorrect to pursue this course of action for fear and irrationality, that an overly relaxed attitude evolves from generally regarded sacredness of life; no religious connotations here.

Ironically, many are not aware of traditional religious texts as steward forming the corner stone of much of today's law and morality, disapproving and forbidding taking of any and all life.

What guarantees does anyone have that someone does not pull the plug on unwilling, generally frail elderly ?

Revisiting traditional questions generally opens a can of worms, especially when trying to derive at a workable solution.

Topics of “we should not kill unless our lives are threatened”, “we should not kill those to whom with have close ties”, the Ik, mountain people who suffered to the extent that moral practices are no longer recognizable to established societies not at the brink of being wiped out, revision of the social contract, all need re-looking at.

A good stab at linking cost of keeping alive those whose lives, that for the foreseeable future could go on much longer, were it not for funds tied up for those nearing the twilight years.

Indeed, where does one draw the line between who needs funds more ?

Answer 7

don't know how old you are, but imagine if you were 30 and 18 year olds said that 30 year olds should be killed. You see, body age may change but your brain remains the same - even older people are, in their heads, 22 and, as you get older, your definition of "old" moves on. 15 year olds think that 30 is old, 30 year olds think that 50 is old then they reach 50 and think "hey, 70 is old".
Actually, the real drain on the council isn't elderly people, most of whom are self-sufficient, but it is single mothers who claim benefits and smokers who fill up hospital beds.

Answer 8

Those elderly people were once contributing to the very fabric of the society that you now claim is being 'drained' by them. That kind of attitude is known as "There is only so much to go around" theory and it is backwards. The more we give, the more we have. That is the truth. Learn it.

Answer 9

I have a cousin in a nursing home after having heart surgury. At 80 he should never had it and now he is a vegative state, think they pull the plug

Answer 10

I think Hitler, Stalin, Adi Amin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Gregor Mendel, Klaus Barbe, Ayatollah Khomeini, Saddam, the DNC, ACLU, World Health Organization, would all agree it is a great and wonderful thing.

Most morally sound folks would probably not favor such a horrible thing.....