English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I am having difficulties because Political and Religion are involved but no one seems to give a dam about patients.I am against the suffering but as a Doctor I am not in favor to supress any life,

2007-01-14 04:59:09 · 10 answers · asked by ldinepi 2 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

10 answers

I am Italian, and i think to know the dramatic situation in Italy, and in particolar of a non believer crushed between the owerhelming
force of the church and of the politicians that more or less openly
do not want to go in open conflict with the church.

It is my considered opinion tha in Europe the most civilized cuntries are The Nederlands ant Switzerlad that do admit Euthanasia.,. When the life is hopeless, one shold have the Absolute Right to terminate it. We all were born independently from our will, i.e. nobody asked beforehand whether we would have desired to live. At least leave us the will of setting the switch to OFF when we want to do so.

Italy is a particularly unfortunate country in this respect for a number of reasons.

In the Roman age, the voluntary termination of life was not considered a sin.... And now I am compelled to close my considerations since would go too far...

2007-01-14 05:36:19 · answer #1 · answered by giorgio s 4 · 1 0

No human being, not even a doctor, has the right to force another human being to continue living if that person no longer wishes to live. It is not for you to be "for" or "against" their suffering, it is for you to respect their choices. Although a doctor has a responsibility to preserve life, there is a point at which it becomes cruel. I hope that, should the quality of my life deteriorate to the point where living entails too much suffering, that I will be shown the same compassion that one would show any other suffering animal. I have always found it sad that a veterinarian will euthanise a pet for a variety of humane reasons, but a doctor will not do the same for a fellow human being. I would suggest that doctors take the time to discuss these issues with their patients, and make sure that their patients' wishes regarding Do Not Recuscitate orders are clearly written and included in their files, and I would also like to see hospitals ask for this information when a patient is admitted. They ask for your next of kin information and all of that, they should be ensuring that their is adequate documentation on file regarding quality of life decisions.

2007-01-14 05:07:53 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The moral issue from a humanist perspective is not whether someone has the choice to end his life, but rather the fear that it will become expected. In order to avoid placing undue burdens on families and society, terminally ill people - or the aged - will be expected to remove themselves.

That is what must be avoided.

2007-01-14 05:08:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I fall somewhere in the middle. I don't believe in active euthanasia either, but if you can be certain a patient will not recover, and is suffering, I don't believe in uselessly prolonging their lives either. There will come a time when that patient will go - so I see little point in extending their suffering and the grief of that person's loved ones.

2007-01-14 05:07:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You first state that you compromise that Fox information is impartial, and then mean that Fox information is an "objective watchdog". that is it? at the same time as are you prepared to believe the Pakistani authorities in any case? at the same time as it probably matches your political agenda? that is in simple terms fantastic the cognitive dissonance human beings have, and the actual undeniable reality that there are human beings available (conservatives even!) that ought to believe the understand the Pakistani authorities over our own in simple terms because they disagree with the guy interior the workplace of President. Then they have the audacity to declare that it truly is patriotism!

2016-11-23 17:56:30 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

You say you are against suffering but that you would support life. So, if a person's life is pure suffering because of a terminal illness, you would attempt to keep them alive and suffering as long as you can.

You're a sick person, and you also need to learn to spell.

2007-01-14 05:05:15 · answer #6 · answered by Michael 5 · 5 0

Benny had a show about Youth in Asia a few years ago.

2007-01-14 05:39:25 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Eutanasia, eh? I'm skeptical of your credentials.

2007-01-14 05:05:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

If you want a Christian standpoint, the Bible speaks directly against the practice. 1 Timothy 1:9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those WHO KILL THEIR FATHERS OR MOTHERS, for murderers..."

2007-01-14 05:05:01 · answer #9 · answered by oldguy63 7 · 0 5

As a doctor you have a spelling problem. Don't write any prescriptions, please.

2007-01-14 05:04:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

fedest.com, questions and answers