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 > We should respect the dying wishes of the terminally ill > Comments

We should respect the dying wishes of the terminally ill : Comments

By Leslie Cannold, published 14/2/2007

We should have the freedom to decide about euthanasia, according to our needs and values.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
Grey, Australian philosophers hold views on euthanasia. I do not pretend to be able to argue this topic so I will [very unethically] quote from Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer#Abortion.2C_euthanasia_and_infanticide which summarises Peter Singer’s arguments as:

Consistent with his general ethical theory, Singer holds that the right to physical integrity is grounded in a being's ability to suffer, and the right to life is grounded in, among other things, the ability to plan and anticipate one's future.
- - - - - - - - - - -
Singer classifies euthanasia as voluntary, involuntary, or non-voluntary. (For possible similar historical definitions of euthanasia see Karl Binding, Alfred Hoche and Werner Catel.) Given his consequentialist approach, the difference between active and passive euthanasia is not morally significant, for the required act/omission doctrine is untenable; killing and letting die are on a moral par when their consequences are the same. Voluntary euthanasia, undertaken with the consent of the subject, is supported by the autonomy of persons and their freedom to waive their rights, especially against a legal background such as the guidelines developed by the courts in the Netherlands. Non-voluntary euthanasia at the beginning or end of life's journey, when the capacity to reason about what is at stake is undeveloped or lost, is justified when swift and painless killing is the only alternative to suffering for the subject.
Posted by billie, Thursday, 15 February 2007 10:39:08 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
Billie, I think you misunderstand. Ethics professors generally do not hold to ethical relativism. Which is the rhetorical rubbish that Leslie and a few commentators were trying to foist on us, in order to try and make themselves look 'tolerant'. Of course, it really just makes them look irrational or ignorant.
Posted by Grey, Thursday, 15 February 2007 1:29:56 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have read all the posts and yet no one who is against Euthanasia can actually come up with a coherent argument. Steve Madden was eloquent in stating just why it can be so important for an autonomous adult to remain an active participant in his dying. Where Grey gets information from is interesting. How would you know what happens in the Netherlands? I speak and read Dutch, do you? Have you read the legislation that covers and lays down the guide lines in the Netherlands? Involuntary and non-voluntary Euthanasia is alive and well in Australia, not so in the Netherlands, because it would not be necessary. Data in Australia is very hard to come by, because it is illegal. You could only quote numbers from the Netherlands where data can be kept. When an anonymous survey was done in Australia by Monash University amongst medicos it found that almost the same number of people are 'killed' in the Netherlands as are in Australia, the difference being of course that in the Netherlands it is the open decision of the patient, not the hidden one made by medical staff. I personally have enormous difficulty with others, who may not hold my spiritual values, making the decision that my pain or discomfort has become too much for me to bear and dose me up to my eyeballs with goodness knows what drugs to stop me from groaning, moaning or perhaps screaming. That is what happens in Australia. Unless you have access to all the information in the Netherlands, don't use it as a warning why it wouldn't work. It is so successful that Belgium has now also legislated to allow Euthanasia.
Posted by yvonne, Thursday, 15 February 2007 5:42:19 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
Yvonne

I agree that people who oppose euthanasia often use the tactic of obfuscation to blur the issues.

It is not a debate about the discussion of ethics by professors, or the validity of reports from any source.

I challenge any anti euthanasia proponent to answer the question I posed in my previous post.

Or is "how to respond to the euthanasia debate" pdf the sum total of their intellect.
Posted by Steve Madden, Thursday, 15 February 2007 6:19:04 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
Steve, "Who has the right to deny me this, my choice. To those whose morals and ethics tell them this is wrong, get stuffed. If you want to die a protracted death, alone, in a incoherent morass of drug induced stupor, your choice. Don't insist it should be mine. "

Very well said.
We have had this discussion before about euthanasia and I still can't comprehend why Christians would value the suffering of people who want to part with life so much they feel they need to prevent patients from being offered some help to leave life peacefully. It seems awfully cruel and incompassionate.

Yvonne, good posts also- I agree.

Often religious people with a religious upbringing oppose euthanasia.
Why?
Maybe I don't get it because I am an atheist, but if Christians think it’s true that Jesus allowed himself to be captured while God approved of Jesus' killing out of love for humanity, then perhaps God would perhaps also understand the issue of love in relationship to euthanasia.

Would a God understand how someone who suffers excruciating pain and has no hope of healing, lost the lust for life?

Would a God understand how much love the close family members feel for this patient and that love and care is the reason why they would allow their loved one to voluntarily end this suffering just as God wanted to end suffering of people by allowing Jesus to be crucified?

Just a thought for the Christians to think about.
Posted by Celivia, Thursday, 15 February 2007 7:50:45 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
Posted by Celivia, Thursday, 15 February 2007 7:50:45 PM
"Just a thought for the Christians to think about."

Another thought for Christians to think about is that technically Jesus did commit suicide.

If you go down to the railway track and wait for a train which you know is going to kill you - you are committing suicide. If you go to Gethsemane and wait for Roman guards who you know are going to kill you - what's the difference?
Posted by Rob513264, Thursday, 15 February 2007 10:43:51 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

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