For those of us who are getting "really up there" (much older)....

[+ newguy]

What are your thoughts about voluntary euthanasia

 

This interesting film "Fade to Black" is all about both sides

of this issue. Being released in Australia right now....

 

NG

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_ziZGMnEKQ

[Chuckball]

Canada recently passed legislation allowing doctor-assisted suicides. Even before the law was amended there were always one-way flights to Switzerland. I have no problem for those who believe illness has meant quality of life is so demeaned that death is a viable option. Whose life is it anyway?

[+ sync]

I'm all for it (subject to thorough quality-of-life evaluation).

[+ WilliamM]

Whose life is it anyway?

 

Also the name of a play on Broadway. When I saw it, Mary Tyler Moore played the lead role. She was so convincing, I was happy when Mary walked on stage after the play -- still alive.

[MikeyGMin]

I believe the ultimate human right is control over our own body. I have seen too many of my older relatives spend the last few months or even years with no life other than simply staying alive. I would never push that choice on anyone who decides to fight until the bitter end, but I certainly don't plan on being one of them.

[+ Charlie]

I have been a contributor to the Hemlock Society and its successor organizations for many years, and fully subscribe to the right of someone to end his life rather than have to suffer to a bitter end because laws based on religious beliefs deny him/her that right.

 

And yet....

 

A very dear friend contracted AIDS in the mid-1980s. Although he remained relatively healthy, he concluded that the symptoms he was experiencing could only get worse, and therefore, with the consent and help of his partner and other friends, he refused further medical help and starved himself to death (a pretty unpleasant way to die, BTW). Other friends who contracted AIDS at the same time fought for whatever medical aid they could get, and lived long, productive lives once effective therapies became available. A couple of them are still alive today, thirty years later.

 

A good friend of mine has pancreatic cancer. After a couple of procedures failed, she took the advice of three of her doctors and entered hospice care, because they told her she had only two weeks left to live. One doctor said there was one more procedure they could try, but she said no, she was ready to go. After six weeks in hospice, without the expected release, she changed her mind and said she would try the procedure after all. I just learned from her that it seems to have worked, and she is starting to enjoy her life again.

 

I have always thought of myself as basically a pessimist, and yet I know that when push comes to shove, I would find it very hard to choose euthanasia.

[Bucky]

Few people choose to die. Many out of fear of the unknown aftermath, others grasping for one more day of life to experience "something" - pain, joy or anything in between.

 

But what if there was some universal rule whereby your life was automatically extinguished as soon as you were no longer productive to positive, societal progress? As soon as you could no longer care for yourself? That's super extreme, yes. But the human trait of compassion may be the evolutionary flaw that derails the core concepts of differential survival and natural selection as more and more of earth's resources are absorbed to "care" for those unsuited for both human and planetary survival.

[Gvtire]

I'm very much for it. There are times, when you have a chronic incurable disease that you'll never recover from and after years of treatment you get to to a point where enough is enough. You want to stop being a burden. Your exhausted emotionally, physically, mentally, spiritually. You don't want to go on anymore and you want to have control of your own life. When I was on dialysis, this how I felt. If this transplant fails, I honestly don't know if I would go back on dialysis.

[+ HornyRetiree]

I believe in everyone's right to make that decision for themselves!

 

I would not take my own life as it would short cut what I came into this life's journey to experience, learn and grow -- taking a short cut would carry over into the next life journey.

[caliguy]

 

But what if there was some universal rule whereby your life was automatically extinguished as soon as you were no longer productive to positive, societal progress? .

That sounds just like Logan's run.

http://www.1000misspenthours.com/posters/postersh-m/logansrun.jpg

[Rangar]

A few years ago when I had to put my dog to sleep and held her while the vet injected her I decided that's the way I want to go. It was literally seconds. It was very emotional and I cried like a baby but I'm grateful I had the choice to do it for my beloved pet to end her pain & suffering. So why shouldn't I have the option to do it for myself or family member?

[bigvalboy]

A few years ago when I had to put my dog to sleep and held her while the vet injected her I decided that's the way I want to go. It was literally seconds. It was very emotional and I cried like a baby but I'm grateful I had the choice to do it for my beloved pet to end her pain & suffering. So why shouldn't I have the option to do it for myself or family member?

 

I recently went through this my pet, and while it was very peaceful it was devastating in it's finality. Yes I too cried like a baby, and the sadness continues, so I understand your pain. I've always joked that I'm leaving this world the same way I came in, kicking and screaming, but the reality is that I now believe in a "Medical Directive". It lays out specific perimeters for when to keep me alive and when to pull the plug.

 

I've told my sister how I feel, that I've lived a life with few regrets, so when it's time, I think she will know it...and I'm OK with that.

[+ WilliamM]

Not always easy. I raised my cat Clinton from a kitten to age 16.

When it came time to put him down, the vet could not find a vein.

 

Soon the room was crowded with other vets to the point that Clinton did not know I was still there. He was a cat that usually accepted everything, and that held true even in this situation.

He was named after Bill Clinton; a vital change from Ollie North, his name when born.

[Rudynate]

For me, taking my own life is pretty much unthinkable. My father died from congestive heart failure, a slow miserable death. I appear to have escaped his fate, but if I thought I was facing that, things might look different.

[+ Charlie]

 

But what if there was some universal rule whereby your life was automatically extinguished as soon as you were no longer productive to positive, societal progress? As soon as you could no longer care for yourself? That's super extreme, yes. But the human trait of compassion may be the evolutionary flaw that derails the core concepts of differential survival and natural selection as more and more of earth's resources are absorbed to "care" for those unsuited for both human and planetary survival.

But who or what would define "productive to positive, societal progress"? (A lot of subjective value words there.) And what force would pull the plug? There are plenty of other human traits, commonly called vices, that can "derail... differential survival and natural selection" just as quickly as the virtue of compassion.

[+ poolboy48220]

That's always been my issue with any sort of system like that - back in the days of ZPG (Zero Population Growth) and discussions of who was qualified to have children vs who was not - who decides? The government? Blech. 20 years ago, gays would have been deemed not qualified.

[Rudynate]

Few people choose to die. Many out of fear of the unknown aftermath, others grasping for one more day of life to experience "something" - pain, joy or anything in between.

 

But what if there was some universal rule whereby your life was automatically extinguished as soon as you were no longer productive to positive, societal progress? As soon as you could no longer care for yourself? That's super extreme, yes. But the human trait of compassion may be the evolutionary flaw that derails the core concepts of differential survival and natural selection as more and more of earth's resources are absorbed to "care" for those unsuited for both human and planetary survival.

 

 

Oh dear. . . Social Darwinism. Why does it always come up in discussions like this? We have not outsmarted natural selection. It operates differently in human populations, but we are no less subject to it. I think Jonas Salk called it the "survival of the wisest."