Euthanasia

[Box]

Could any of you be specific about what makes it wrong to euthanize a human being?
With that question, I don't mean to imply that I don't see anything wrong with it

Is it suicide? Is it murder? Which is worse: letting the guy suffer, or putting him out of his misery? Is religion a factor? Can anyone cite the Bible?

boil it down to something simple, but I think it's a matter of perspective

Personally, I don't mind--but only if it's for the right reasons. Therefore, I do mind. (explaining)

I don't necessarily believe euthanasia is wrong, per se, but it could become something much worse than abortion

exploitation=wrongful death

 

[Stefan Bauwens]

Well, I do think it is murder/suicide(depending on the case), and that is why I disagree with it.

Because to me morally it is incorrect and because it is a sin according to the Bible to murder.

To me, your last suffering can be a test to see if you still will make the right choice. I wouldn't want to fail my last test...

Would you risk committing a sin right before you die because you *think* there is no God?

 

[Yoggs]

Would you risk committing a sin right before you die because you *think* there is no God?

Easily.

 

[.chasm.]

This is directed more towards Stefan, but anyone else can feel free to answer it:

You're against ending a life prematurely because it goes against God's will, but does this mean that you're also against prolonging someone's life through unnatural means? By that, I mean things like life-support, where it's a certainty that someone would not survive if they were not receiving continued treatment. Would you say that both things go against God's will and are therefore bad, as only He should decide when we die? After all, both things are interfering with the time God decides a person should die, with the only real difference being whether that time is being delayed or brought forward.

 

[Stefan Bauwens]

Interfering with nature isn't per se against God's will. It is God's will that we treat others good, and if that means interfering, so what?

However murder is against God's will. So you see, quite an easy line to distinguish.

 

[.chasm.]

The thing is, though, some would consider euthanasia to be interfering with nature to treat another person well. The only difference is that this does well by respecting their wishes and ending their pain.

Plus, it's important to note that some people don't consider euthanasia to be murder. By definition, murder is the unlawful and unjustified killing of another. Some people would argue that it isn't unjustified, as it it following a patient's wishes (though the law, at least in England, doesn't make that distinction).

 

[TamaMum]

Let's put aside the religious aspect of this for a moment (murder / suicide debate) and consider the idea of what is "right" or "wrong"

The basic principles of the classic "Hippocratic Oath" followed by medical professionals are:

• Of solidarity with teachers and other physicians.
• To do good or avoid evil and to do no harm towards patients.
• Not to assist suicide or abortion.
• To leave surgery to surgeons.
• Not to harm, especially not to seduce patients.
• To maintain confidentiality and never to gossip.'

There are different versions of this but they all pretty much acknowledge these "guidelines".

We assume that we have the right to control our bodies and make decisions about it ourselves but we also have obligations - to friends, family, medical professionals. I think we should have a choice but it is not a "right" over everything and everyone else. That seems pretty selfish to me.

It must be an informed choice and one that is balanced against the consequences for those we leave behind and how our death will affect them - grief, guilt, anger, legal proceedings.

Sometimes family members can't bear to see a loved one in pain - but they are also suffering and they should be asking themselves am I supporting a decision for Euthanasia only for this loved one or is it also about the strain and sadness I have to bear each day and getting some relief from it?

Life is important - not just to ourselves but for those around us, those we interact with - our community - school / work place / social groups / neighbourhood - it's society.

I can't help have concerns that although I really believe that individual choice is very important, each time someone takes steps towards Euthanasia - even in informed, lucid situations there are repercussions - to society, to the "value" of life and I think there are small impacts on things like "involuntary" Euthanasia when someone is unable to make the decision for themselves.

I can't help feeling that it makes their existance less meaningful and I am not sure I have the right to start a ball rolling towards "normalising" something so immense.

It's such a tough call and I really don't have any firm opinion on it - just anxieties - and a sense that it has the danger of being a "selfish" decision based on the rights of one individual over everyone else. For me, this is one of the things that could make it "wrong" to euthanise a human being,