It makes sense to me for the terminally ill to be forced into treatments that may help people in the future. Not if it takes away from their comfort...only if it is a minor inconvenience. It could be good fo them and the future of our society.
2007-09-18 12:29:58 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Wouldn't God want that?
2007-09-18 12:30:14 · update #1
I'm really not joking. I'm not for hurting people, but harmless drug experimentation... why not?
2007-09-18 12:35:13 · update #2
Nope, that would be an unethical violation of personal autonomy.
2007-09-18 12:32:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Ummm,
Are you serious?
Guess what! We're ALL terminally ill! There isn't one of us that shall get off this ride alive. What's the difference between forcing someone with cancer, or anyone .... say ... you ... to do the same?
Experimental means just that; we don't know with certainty what will happen. Your recommended limit of "minor inconvenience" is arbitrary and ultimately meaningless. If a person is tired of fighting and wishes no further treatment and is prepared to die, then even the experimentation is more than a "minor inconvenience". Experimental treatments should be available to those who wish to try them, but should be imposed on no-one.
I might make an exception for criminals who are incarcerated for life; it may help to recover some of the money used to house them for so many years.
2007-09-18 12:41:06 · answer #2 · answered by Deirdre H 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
How do you assume the FDA to approve a drug with out rather attempting it on the individuals it is meant to help? Your question would not make experience. merely because of the fact a drug is somewhat stable at killing maximum cancers in a rat does no longer mean it is going to paintings in someone. in case you seem on the way drugs are authorized by employing the FDA, you will see that it inevitably demands drug trials on human matters. and you realize what?? each each now and then those experimental drugs DO paintings on terminal sufferers and that they get so plenty greater time than they ever might have had with out engaging interior the analyze. that's for sure a homework question, and that i'm questioning how poorly knowledgeable your instructor would desire to be to think of that the FDA delivers approval to a drug it is meant for use on people if it is by no skill been examined on people... perhaps you're no longer the only one that has some getting to know to do.
2016-10-09 10:32:23 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The key word here is forced.
If they've done nothing to deserve having their freedom of choice taken away, then no, they shouldn't HAVE to do anything.
Now, if they want to volunteer, it's another matter. If I was dying and there was some experimental procedure that might help, even if only with a small chance at success, I'd sign right up.
2007-09-18 12:34:56 · answer #4 · answered by Eldritch 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You are kidding. NO WAY!
How inhumane is this! WHy would you subject someone to painful treatments, whether it really hurts or is a minor inconvenience?
I do not believe in forcing the terminally ill to do anything.
It is unconstitutional.
Gross.....
If you are trying to be funny, you are not succeeding.
2007-09-18 12:35:10 · answer #5 · answered by batgirl2good 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No way, because how would you regulate that? Scientists would come up with more and more invasive procedures and there would be no way to keep it to 'only a minor inconvenience.' Next would be old people, or other segments of society that are considered expendable...
2007-09-18 12:36:44 · answer #6 · answered by Lady Miss Keir 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
don't have a problem with the terminal ill being asked but it should not be forced upon them. If they just want nature to takes its course they should be allowed.
2007-09-18 12:35:13 · answer #7 · answered by Pandora 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why not use people on death row for such experiments? The terminally ill already go thru alot of experimental treatments
2007-09-18 12:35:09 · answer #8 · answered by tebone0315 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
i think they should be given the option not forced, how would you feel if you were terminally ill and forced to do anything you didnt want to, and as for god, ok what a load of crap, if he existed people wouldnt die slow, painful deaths
2007-09-18 12:36:28 · answer #9 · answered by t.s 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
IYou mean wouldn't atheist want that. After all it would be for the betterment of the common man. That has already been done by the way, with mentally challenged kids in WWII. Look up Heinrich Gross.
2007-09-18 12:39:03 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I would most definitely disagree. While I think they should be allowed to volunteer, noone should be forced to submit their body to proceedures they do not want done. Period. Being terminal does not make you less human, and humans have the right to control what is done to their bodies.
2007-09-18 12:34:09 · answer #11 · answered by Nightwind 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋