Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

With the passing of "Dr. Death" Jack Kevorkian today, what are your thoughts on physician assisted suicide? Some countries allow it, some governents are still wrestling with it - many people in chronic pain request it. Should euthanasia for humans be legal?

What's wrong with euthanasia? I love kids.

bandl wrote:What's wrong with euthanasia? I love kids.

I agree. By their hard work, they set a good example for euthanamerica.

THIS



NOT

ASUG8 wrote:THIS



NOT

Why do you want to kill euthanasia?

I'll help you anyway I can ASUG8 and I will go so far as using a hammer if you'll allow it.

At least it can be said in truth for once that the fella went out pursuing his life dream and doing what he loved.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:I'll help you anyway I can ASUG8 and I will go so far as using a hammer if you'll allow it.

At least it can be said in truth for once that the fella went out pursuing his life dream and doing what he loved.

Good to know ya got my back if I need it.

ASUG8 wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:I'll help you anyway I can ASUG8 and I will go so far as using a hammer if you'll allow it.

At least it can be said in truth for once that the fella went out pursuing his life dream and doing what he loved.

Good to know ya got my back if I need it.

I don't understand why people would oppose this, so long as the sick person requests it, who cares?

I find it very interesting that Kervorkian didn't request the "physician assisted suicide" during his final days.

Vidav wrote:I don't understand why people would oppose this, so long as the sick person requests it, who cares?

Because doctors are supposed to treat patients and pain ... not intentionally kill their patients.

There's a lot of doctor can do in order to treat pain in a terminal patient. Often, in treating pain, the doctor may prescribe some drug which turns out to have a lethal effect. We should leave it to the discretion of the doctor, working in consultation with the patient and the family, on how to proceed in such cases when the administration of pain medication to treat pain may also have a lethal effect. We should presume that the doctor is not intending to kill the patient, but is rather trying to treat pain, and trust in his good faith and medical judgment.

But there's a huge difference between what is discussed above and setting out intentionally to kill a patient. Setting up some machine to provide a person with a lethal dosage of carbon monoxide is not the practice of medicine -- it is murder. Euthanasia -- intentionally setting out to kill the patient -- is likewise murder.

JoltinJoe wrote:

Vidav wrote:I don't understand why people would oppose this, so long as the sick person requests it, who cares?

Because doctors are supposed to treat patients and pain ... not intentionally kill their patients.

There's a lot of doctor can do in order to treat pain in a terminal patient. Often, in treating pain, the doctor may prescribe some drug which turns out to have a lethal effect. We should leave it to the discretion of the doctor, working in consultation with the patient and the family, on how to proceed in such cases when the administration of pain medication to treat pain may also have a lethal effect. We should presume that the doctor is not intending to kill the patient, but is rather trying to treat pain, and trust in his good faith and medical judgment.

But there's a huge difference between what is discussed above and setting out intentionally to kill a patient. Setting up some machine to provide a person with a lethal dosage of carbon dioxide is not the practice of medicine -- it is murder.

A doctor has a responsibility to ease pain and suffering - for a terminal patient whose life has become mere existence - nothing short of daily pain and suffering - they ought to have the right to say "no mas" It's an act of compassion - not of murder.

They could just "forget" a lethal amount of drugs by the patient and leave the room. Then it's suicide.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:
Because doctors are supposed to treat patients and pain ... not intentionally kill their patients.

There's a lot of doctor can do in order to treat pain in a terminal patient. Often, in treating pain, the doctor may prescribe some drug which turns out to have a lethal effect. We should leave it to the discretion of the doctor, working in consultation with the patient and the family, on how to proceed in such cases when the administration of pain medication to treat pain may also have a lethal effect. We should presume that the doctor is not intending to kill the patient, but is rather trying to treat pain, and trust in his good faith and medical judgment.

But there's a huge difference between what is discussed above and setting out intentionally to kill a patient. Setting up some machine to provide a person with a lethal dosage of carbon dioxide is not the practice of medicine -- it is murder.

A doctor has a responsibility to ease pain and suffering - for a terminal patient whose life has become mere existence - nothing short of daily pain and suffering - they ought to have the right to say "no mas" It's an act of compassion - not of murder.

Vidav wrote:They could just "forget" a lethal amount of drugs by the patient and leave the room. Then it's suicide.

doctors have been doing this for decades... they prescribe morphine and say "remember - be careful - a double dose would be almost instantly lethal..." and leave it at that...

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:
Because doctors are supposed to treat patients and pain ... not intentionally kill their patients.

There's a lot of doctor can do in order to treat pain in a terminal patient. Often, in treating pain, the doctor may prescribe some drug which turns out to have a lethal effect. We should leave it to the discretion of the doctor, working in consultation with the patient and the family, on how to proceed in such cases when the administration of pain medication to treat pain may also have a lethal effect. We should presume that the doctor is not intending to kill the patient, but is rather trying to treat pain, and trust in his good faith and medical judgment.

But there's a huge difference between what is discussed above and setting out intentionally to kill a patient. Setting up some machine to provide a person with a lethal dosage of carbon dioxide is not the practice of medicine -- it is murder.

A doctor has a responsibility to ease pain and suffering - for a terminal patient whose life has become mere existence - nothing short of daily pain and suffering - they ought to have the right to say "no mas" It's an act of compassion - not of murder.

A doctor's obligation is to treat pain and the patient. He has no right to assist in the intentional death of his patient.

Vidav wrote:They could just "forget" a lethal amount of drugs by the patient and leave the room. Then it's suicide.

No, if those are the facts, that doctor gets prosecuted and convicted.

JoltinJoe wrote:

Vidav wrote:They could just "forget" a lethal amount of drugs by the patient and leave the room. Then it's suicide.

No, if those are the facts, that doctor gets prosecuted and convicted.

only if you have someone pushing it and a DA looking for headlines...

this happens. frequently, and you don't hear about it.

JoltinJoe wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
A doctor has a responsibility to ease pain and suffering - for a terminal patient whose life has become mere existence - nothing short of daily pain and suffering - they ought to have the right to say "no mas" It's an act of compassion - not of murder.

A doctor's obligation is to treat pain and the patient. He has no right to assist in the intentional death of his patient.

re-read the Hippocratic Oath. "If it is given to me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty."

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:
No, if those are the facts, that doctor gets prosecuted and convicted.

only if you have someone pushing it and a DA looking for headlines...

this happens. frequently, and you don't hear about it.

If you have a DA who is applying the law, you mean.

The only way this happens and they get away with it is if there is no autopsy. However, any doctor who does this and gets caught is likely to have his license to practice medicine revoked. I doubt it happens as often as you think.

My guess is what happens more often is that a doctor prescribes a dosage of a painkiller knowing that it will kill the patient, given the patient's condition, but the amount prescribed doesn't raise a red flag that the prescription was intended to be lethal. That's still murder, since the intent was to kill the patient, but likely impossible to prove.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:
A doctor's obligation is to treat pain and the patient. He has no right to assist in the intentional death of his patient.

re-read the Hippocratic Oath. "If it is given to me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty."

The Hippocratic Oath is not the law. Nor has it ever been accepted that the this provision of the Hippocratic Oath permits a doctor to act intentionally to kill a patient.

JoltinJoe wrote:

Vidav wrote:I don't understand why people would oppose this, so long as the sick person requests it, who cares?

Because doctors are supposed to treat patients and pain ... not intentionally kill their patients.

There's a lot of doctor can do in order to treat pain in a terminal patient. Often, in treating pain, the doctor may prescribe some drug which turns out to have a lethal effect. We should leave it to the discretion of the doctor, working in consultation with the patient and the family, on how to proceed in such cases when the administration of pain medication to treat pain may also have a lethal effect. We should presume that the doctor is not intending to kill the patient, but is rather trying to treat pain, and trust in his good faith and medical judgment.

But there's a huge difference between what is discussed above and setting out intentionally to kill a patient. Setting up some machine to provide a person with a lethal dosage of carbon dioxide is not the practice of medicine -- it is murder. Euthanasia -- intentionally setting out to kill the patient -- is likewise murder.

JJ, I can't argue the legal merits of this and I want you to understand that this is not what I'm doing in spite of how this may look. On a philosophical level though if the two parties in question are in agreement that this is the best way to have a compassionate ending for the patient whether it be through drugs or through a machine that does the job in a humane fashion I just can't see why this shouldn't be a contract or procedure that ought to be recognized as something other than murder. I don't think I'm alone or even that you wouldn't agree that this is a pretty loose definition of murder and does not strike at the spirit of the definition.

JoltinJoe wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
re-read the Hippocratic Oath. "If it is given to me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty."

The Hippocratic Oath is not the law. Nor has it ever been accepted that the this provision of the Hippocratic Oath permits a doctor to act intentionally to kill a patient.

There's a reason it's called assisted suicide. The doctor provides the means, the patient does it themselves. They aren't carrying out the act of killing.

Grizalltheway wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:
The Hippocratic Oath is not the law. Nor has it ever been accepted that the this provision of the Hippocratic Oath permits a doctor to act intentionally to kill a patient.

There's a reason it's called assisted suicide. The doctor provides the means, the patient does it themselves. They aren't carrying out the act of killing.

That's all in one's perspective. Some would hold that providing the means is tantamount to doing it.

SuperHornet wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:
There's a reason it's called assisted suicide. The doctor provides the means, the patient does it themselves. They aren't carrying out the act of killing.

That's all in one's perspective. Some would hold that providing the means is tantamount to doing it.

It's ultimately their choice. Period.