The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > 'Unproductive burdens' still have a right to live > Comments

'Unproductive burdens' still have a right to live : Comments

By David van Gend, published 1/4/2011

Getting older? Do you agree with ex-GG Bill Hayden 'There is a point when the succeeding generations deserve to be disencumbered of some unproductive burdens.'?

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
" .. I would not use the argument against euthanasia that "palliative care can ease all suffering". We cannot ease all suffering in dying ... "

True.
...............

"In Oregon, for instance, of the 49 patients who died by physician-assisted suicide in 2007 not a single patient was referred for psychiatric assessment prior to taking their lethal drug."

Yes, psychiatric or psychological assessment or both would be highly desirable.

Whether 'euthanasia [is] a corruption of the doctor-patient relationship and .. an insidious oppression of society's "unproductive burdens" ' is debatable, so requires further elaboration, discussion and debate.

What should not be trivialised is the reality these discussions are the domain of all in society and is not just driven by the Greens or their haters.
Posted by McReal, Friday, 1 April 2011 10:05:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David van Gend,

‘Man’ has imperfections which need to be made clear.

We are free to end our life at any time until we can do it ourselves, freedom that we loose when we need the help of another.

Those of us who, like you, have chosen to alleviate ‘Man’s physical ills’ are in the same situation of others, their opinions having to be limited to their own person.

Mr. Bill Hayden and Mr. Mark Oliphant, driven by personal beliefs, exceeded their rights as ‘Man’, by talking for others and using the term ‘burden’.

But so would Mr. David van Gend, who calls himself a Doctor, were he to translate his personal beliefs into actions against a patient wish.

I am sure that he, Doctor, realizes that there is more than one side to medicine; there are medicos whose work consists in depriving poor people or ones to be executed, of organs to transplant to ones who can afford to pay for the service. There are also medicos in factional hospitals (managed by religion imbibed nuts) and others who work for drug manufacturers.

In the face of one who wishes but is unable to perform what is necessary to end his/her life, a man like Mr. van Gend should set himself aside, on the ground of his convictions and leave the one in need to the care of who has just compassion.

That the Dutch statistics continue unchanged since Euthanasia was adopted, is only matter of ‘criminality’ immanent in western society.
Posted by skeptic, Friday, 1 April 2011 11:02:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David van Gend is a sad Catholic dupe!
Posted by lockhartlofty, Friday, 1 April 2011 11:50:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes David, of course all people have a right to live, including those in pain that cannot be assisted by modern palliative care methods.

No one is advocating involuntary euthanasia.

Anyone who wants to fight to the bitter end will be free to do so.
Those that don't, should be able to ask for help to die.

We all know there are bad Doctors out there already who live life on the edge and push the legal boundaries where death and dying patients are concerned. I include those doctors who hasten deaths, as well as those who let patients linger on in a state of living hell.
I doubt this would change if voluntary euthanasia were to be made legal.

As for advocating that psychiatrists should check on the mental state of all dying patients who request euthanasia before their wishes to die are granted, I agree. However, I doubt we could use some depression as a reason to stop the process, were it legal, because I would imagine that the bulk of people who are dying, and who are asking for euthanasia, would most certainly be depressed!

Wouldn't you?

Would you imagine that any amount of anti-depressants or assistance from a mental health expert would really help much at this last stage of life if you were so upset that you asked to be given a lethal injection because of unrelieved symptoms?

I doubt it.

At the end of the day, any VOLUNTARY Euthanasia legislation enacted would allow the CHOICE for dying patients to decide if they want to continue living in the state they are in, right up until the 'natural' death occurs, or whether they would prefer to skip that part and leave a little earlier.

If you want to soldier on to the bitter end (whether that be in pain, unrelieved nausea, diarrhoea, vomiting, bleeding, and fitting), then go right ahead.

Just leave the rest of us alone to make our own end of life decisions.
Posted by suzeonline, Friday, 1 April 2011 12:40:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
suseonline, thank you, beautifully put. My life, my choice, my decision.

Those who feel differently should listen very carefully. “Get one, they are great” one what? “A life of your own, then you would stay out of mine”.
Posted by spindoc, Friday, 1 April 2011 5:20:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think somehow that I would prefer if all doctors could be fully ethical and moral (and not otherwise be allowed to practice), and that they could then be fully relied upon to make the right decision in the circumstances.

I would not like to be kicking around in a lousy state, unable to look after myself, having to have someone to wipe me down, etc, and being faced with a tough decision of having to ask someone to "put me down for heaven sake".

I'd like a decent, compassionate physician to make the decision "to do the right thing" - after making sure, discreetly, that I had been given a chance to make my peace with my maker beforehand.

If I had a partner at the time, I think I would also prefer if they were not consulted either. I wouldn't like that weight to be put on anyone (other than my physician). Sorry, physicians, burden of the trade. (Profession, sorry.)

I've always said that, when it comes to my time, I'm going to go off into the bush somewhere, where there's a great view, and great peace, and just lie down (with a good stiff scotch or two) and let nature take its course. But, of course, I suspect I would never have the guts to do it. And, as a responsible firearms owner (and responsible user), there is no way I would think about blowing my brains out - (wouldn't want to give the anti-gun lobby any more ammunition). (And too messy anyway.) (And I'm afraid that would be against my religion anyway, and, much as people might snicker, I couldn't help thinking how that would hurt my mum in heaven looking down.)

I suspect a lot of other people would also not be able to ask for euthanasia, on similar religious grounds.

Sorry to disagree with suzeonline about antidepressants, but I think there would be instances where medication and counselling could give many a worthwhile (hap, hap, happy) extension. Pity our mental health system is so deficient - both public and private I'm afraid!
Posted by Saltpetre, Saturday, 2 April 2011 2:30:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy