Your oppinion..honestly

[nascar08]

ok. my school report is on assisted suicide. i want your oppinion. My personal oppinion is im against it due to the fact its doctors getting away with murder and its no justicfiable. but hey its ok i guess look at this oregon has a law for it, ohio does, vermont does, hawii, and few other states. but they say its illegal to poison someone and shoot em but assisting in someone who wants to die is not right but im just stating my oppinion.

 

[Ross]

I'm very torn on this. Morally it's wrong, but I've seen things that tell my moral self to shut up. This is one that I can't simply say yes or no too.

 

[Blanche]

A controversial subject

A controversial subject

It appears to me that you will have to go a great deal of research on the topic so that your paper will be balanced and supported by data. Sometimes a good place to start in an encyclopedia. I hope the link that I am leaving will help get you started. There is a great deal of information in this article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia

I'd be interested to know what grade you are in and what class requires the assignment.

Kindest regards,
Blanche

 

[geebee]

I really have a problem with the term "assisted suicide". I think the term should be "right to die". When someone is terminal and 3 doctors have confirmed it, they have the right to decide when they are tired of the pain and agony. There are many steps one must go through to be allowed to end their suffering including psychiatric evaluation to make sure they are doing it for themselves and not feeling pressured by family.

There is a big difference between the right to die and the "obligation" to die and we have to be very careful not to cross that line. One is chosen by the person who is dying; the other most probably not.

However, unless one is actually faced with the issue, one would never know how they would react so be careful when fighting the laws against it. You may end up hurting yourself. Just because the rights are there does not mean people have to use them.

 

[pedimed]

I think it is difficult to say absolutely one way or the other, as the decision can be so situation dependent.

Geene- I agree with what you said regarding "right to die" versus "assisted suicide" I wanted to add to this that quality of life should come into this discussion as well, and then to add to the complicated"nesss" of the topic, who defines quality of life, and how!

Have no answers just wanted to throw out the quality of life issue as needing to play a part...(If I dont keep this short, Ill write a novel! )

-Lea

 

[Superbob]

I am against assisted suicide. That's just another slippery slope in the devaluation of life. Partial-birth abortion is another.

Does your teacher take off for spelling and grammar? Just wondering.

 

[nascar08]

im in 11th and its my a research project for Criminal Justice English or English 3 but i mean i chose this b.c in my opinion its wrong im not wanting to start controversy but im just seeing how people feel about it.yeah she will

 

[greg]

Justin,
My mom is in a nursing home, and has been for about 18 months. Her mind is mostly OK but the body has failed. I assure you, my opinion has changed.
No quality of life is no life. Put your own definition on quality of life.
If you want to do something fun, spend several hours in a nursing home. Help people eat, visit with them, share yourself with them, read to them. I don't know what you will learn but you will improve their life quality by just investing your time.
It will probably give more insight to your report.
Good question. Share your report please. We all would be interested.

 

[Karlynn]

I would tend to concur on the quality of life reasoning. However, the problem I see is: who makes those decisions and how do you craft laws so that it doesn't get completely misinterpreted. Having a mentally disabled brother that my sister is legal guardian for, and who always consults me on decisions, our fear is that decisions like that will be taken out of our hands by state lawyers and rogue judges who legislate from the bench. I have had nightmares about my brother being denied medication that would save his life because he was deemed by doctors and those in power to not have a quality of life that they see as worthwhile.

Everyone has their own thoughts on what constitutes an appropriate quality of life. My husband's and mine even differ. Some would say that a painful, fatal illness would be a reason to allow someone to choose to die. I've heard others even argue that people with mental illness should be allowed to have that option. It's a very slippery slope.

 

[Superbob]

It is commendable that you want to do a good job with your report. So please understand that I am not picking on you.

Decide what you believe in (not just what you "feel") and state your arguments in complete sentences. Blanche gave you great advice about using reference books, such as an encyclopedia. Lay out your arguments confidently; however, she also had a good point about writing a balanced report that will take into account differing points of view without ridiculing them.

My suggestion is also to have a good dictionary on hand in writing this or any other report. I have a paperback Merriam-Webster right beside my computer. It cost only $6.50. Yes, I know you can use spellcheck on the computer but you get a better feel for words when you look them up in print. Plus, spellcheck does not always account for shadings of meaning.

For gosh sakes, don't write in your paper that you are stating your "oppinion." Look that one up right now for yourself. Remember that contractions take an apostrophe ("I'm").

Just a few suggestions. Good luck with your report.

 

[hensylee]

Hey, Justin. Wow, you opened up a really deep discussion, didn't you. As we respond, you will find a myriad of opinions and reasons for and against. May I suggest you go on the net and look up Dr Kevorkian. He is the one who originally opened this can or worms that started a national debate.

As for me, I just went through years of seeing my brother suffer. He wanted to die. Yet in the end he was very frightened. He had signed a paper years ago telling his doctors not to save him if he was in danger of dying. They did not follow his order so he lived on after coming close to death because they did a procedure that kept him alive. A doctor called me to ask my permission for the procedure - he said my brother would die without it. I told him I could not help my brother die but my brother had made the decision himself and nobody should have asked me. Mother also had a paper signed. A nurse told us to guard her 24/7 if we wanted that paper honored because doctors would give her medicine that would keep her alive and she'd most likely be in a vegetative state - something we knew she didn't want. Nor did we. My sister and I kept a vigil beside her bed and sure nuff the dr tried to persuade us to let him insert things that would keep her alive. We said no, leave her in peace. She was 91 years old and her zest for living had long been gone.

Every case is different, Justin. You are so young and life is so very important. When you grow older, go back and read your report. You might find that your maturity gives you and entirely different perspective. Or, maybe not.

Good luck......

 

[Dennis S]

I have to agree with Gina on this one.

I have to agree with Gina on this one.

This is indeed a difficult topic. The one resolution I have worked hardest to keep has been a resolution that life is ultimately precious. Keeping such a resolution is harder than it might first sound. If life really is precious, we should not allow our lives to become trivial. If my goal in life is to find a good TV show and work on my stamp collection-perhaps I need to ask myself if my actions are consistent with my stated belief that life is precious. I want the preciousness of life to be a first thought in the morning, and continue throughout the day.

Having said that, I am ultimately persuaded by the arguments Gina has made. My son had a good friend whose father died (I think) of Lou Gehrig?s disease. Several times he nearly died (by suffocation) from things more graphic than I care to write. From what I understand his mind was probably clear, and he fully experienced every moment of pain, degradation and fear. This torment lasted for a long time, as this is a particularly horrible disease. His teenage son was a straight A student, and a martial arts expert who competed in the national junior Olympics. But the final year of his father?s torment crushed the life from his son. This incredibly strong and disciplined young man spiraled into failures and trouble with the law for several years.

Perhaps our feelings on this depend completely on our experience. Some who are called by the circumstances of life to protect friends or family members who are weak and vulnerable are in a good position to warn about the ?slippery slope?. Some who have been close to suffering they could not have imagined will see it differently. I am in the second group, and that?s why I agree with Gina on this one.

 

[Cooker]

I'm very torn on this. Morally it's wrong, but I've seen things that tell my moral self to shut up. This is one that I can't simply say yes or no too.

I agree with Ross, sort of. The moral question is not one we can answer for anyone else. Your moral stance and mine may vary. I would not want anyone to decide this for me but I feel I should have the right to do so.

If a person is able to make the choice and is judged able to do so by the court, medical team etc. there should be no intervention from friends or family.

Very emotional topic.

Tom

 

[ALCapshaw2]

WELL SAID Gina !

When our animals are suffering or in a terminal condition, we are told that the HUMANE thing to do is to 'put them to sleep'.

When People are suffering or in a terminal condition we are REQUIRED to keep them alive to suffer more pain or agony until their body finally fails completely. Where is the HUMANITY in that?

I agree that there is a very slippery slope when deciding someone else's fate, but I fail to understand denying a mentally competent individual the Right to Die when their circumstances are hopeless and they face a slow and cruel death by deterioration.

'AL Capshaw'

 

[savysmommy]

WELL SAID Gina !

When our animals are suffering or in a terminal condition, we are told that the HUMANE thing to do is to 'put them to sleep'.

When People are suffering or in a terminal condition we are REQUIRED to keep them alive to suffer more pain or agony until their body finally fails completely. Where is the HUMANITY in that?

'AL Capshaw'

I agree with this too. I think the only reason we dont put people "to sleep" is because of all the laws in place, and possible lawsuits for doing so. There seems to always be a reason to sue somebody these days.

I think its your right as a human to be 'put to sleep' if your terminaly ill.
Just my thoughts..

 

[nascar08]

yeah i know. im not wanting any fights this is actually helping me with my research. and yeah my grandpa has alzheimers. hes toward the final stages. but i understand all aspects and when the research is typed..somewhere around another 2-3 weeks..ill put it up here and yeah it will be my opinion and im just against it. ive looked at both aspects and its just an opinion and thanks for all the posts...maybe ill use some of these points lol

 

[Debbrn]

I do not have much experience in the adult realm, but I have a lot in the pediatric age population as a pediatric nurse.

Babies in the womb are aborted every day because of various defects regardless of severity. It is very common and legal. Years ago I was talking to my sister about taking care of 3 babies with spina bifida. Her statement to me was "Did the parents know that the child was going to have spina bifida?" I told her that some did and some did not. Her response was "And they did not abort them." Years later my mother told me that "if I conceived another child with the same defect as yours, I would have done what I had to to have an abortion". Now whether you agree with abortion or not. Aborting a child simply because they have a very survivable defect, I am completely against.

I have also taken care of a child with a very catastrophic illness in which he was currently in a lot of pain. The child was a DNR according to the parents wishs. We where giving him morphine for pain control. The parents were very aware that in order to control his pain effectly that dose of morphine we were giving him possibly would make him stop breathing and then we would not resusitate him according to their wishs. That did not happen and they were evently able to take him home for what time he had left. From what I understand this does happen with adults.

What is not legal in most states is giving some one medication with the intention of dying.

I have seen too many children suffer that are full codes, but I still have no right to make the decision for someone else.

Debbie

 

[geebee]

My mother was in a nursing home for the last few years of her "life". She was under a DNR and that was honored by the staff. In addition, she had already indicated she wanted no extreme measures to keep her alive, including feeding tubes, respirators, etc.

In the end she stopped eating. She did not seem aware of her surroundings but was still "able" to take food by mouth and just wouldn't. My opinion is that she decided she had enough.

She was kept sedated and was very calm every time we visited. She responded with smiling and occasional hand squeezing. We know she was comfortable and just plain worn out.

We did nothing to hasten her death but we did nothing to prevent it. She was not capable of expressing any decision about requesting medicine to hasten her death and we would never have made that decision as it was not ours to make. She made her own decision when she stopped eating.

There is absolutely no difference between not putting in a feeding tube and providing pills to people to end their lives other than one is a long journey to death and the other is much faster. The result is the same - a person choosing to move to the next life.

 

[nascar08]

well the DNR. im ok ok with. but when someone wants to just kill themselves because of athritis or maybe lack of knowledge of a certain illlness..is just wrong. my grandpa has DNR i respect that. there is a situation where i will say yeah it was right to do it. and then again there will be a situation where ill say it was wrong.

now onto my grammer lol..yeah i dont use Formal English on here. yeah its easier to read and understand. when i do school work, ie: research, i will use formal english. i understand what you are saying and i understand.

thanks for your viewpoints and keep 'em coming because ill print this off, take it to school and use these in my research.

 

[geebee]

well the DNR. im ok ok with. but when someone wants to just kill themselves because of athritis or maybe lack of knowledge of a certain illlness..is just wrong.

Justin,

The laws that are in place would not allow someone with anything less than a terminal illness, or perhaps someone in excrutiating pain that meds do not help, to be allowed the right to die. There are a lot of rules in place including multiple doctors' diagnosis before it will even be considered. It is not there for people who think they want to die for trivial reasons and certainly not for someone who is mentally incompetent.

Please understand I am not trying to change your mind. I would just like the facts to be clear.